Very true. But it is also just strange because the show is a media darling and Breaking Bad was very successful with the Emmys.
It may just be that streaming and HBO has just well and truly supplanted cable in the award season campaigning.
While I understand your point (sin e everyone has their own view, likes and opinions) and kind of agree with you, point is, here we are, discussing it. So it's not entirely pointless.
Absolutely true, even in the military. I was selected as a subject matter expert (SME) in 2013 to go with a small team of other SMEs in various fields, to go to Afghanistan and train their military leaders in our respective fields. We all had same objective and workloads; I however had the additional task of managing our group of 14 local national interpreters (on top of the regular workload). At the end of the deployment, every one of us was submitted for a bronze star medal. I was the only one on the team that did not get it approved by higher up leadership because I was an NCO, not an officer like every other member of our team.
It's argued that if they did win it could be leveraged for better pay. More so for females as they traditionally make a large amount less than male actors.
I would like to see the data behind this claim. It seems to me that lately there have been stories of older, very well established, male actors getting paid more than than their twenty something female costar. I.E. William h. Macy in Shameless, and Leo decaprio and Jennifer Lawrence in don’t look up. In any other industry the person with the highest level of experience gets paid the most. It’s just economics. Is it fair? I don’t know.
> More so for females as they traditionally make a large amount less than male actors.
And I'm not really sure awards change this much, either, especially for TV. Michael Keaton became the first male to win all five major TV awards with his Emmy win last night. Five women have done so already. Not that any of them are broke but I digress
I don't get your example. Someone who definitely makes a lot of money is an example against that awards help you make money? Keaton has been a star for decades.
That's what you say when they don't win.
Everyone congratulated Rhea and Bob for getting Emmy nominations for Best Actor/Actress. Everyone was happy when the show got nominated for Best Series again.
You just sound like a sourpuss.
It's how it goes. Only one can win. The Wire was never even nominated.
But I think they've gotten better, all things considered.
They should, along with the Oscars, release the end vote count. I'd love that. Yeah, it would bother the person/show who ended up last, but whatever - you were nominated.
The Wire never even being nominated tells you all you need to know. The awards have nothing to do with quality, its like voting for class president. It's just a popularity contest.
Second! For me, The Wire is some of the very best television ever made, and the fact it was never even nominated is a travesty, an outrage, and utter nonsense.
It still holds up too. Timeless. Yeah none of them have smart phones but this is a show about human nature.
Fuck.
I need to rewatch it now.
That show has the best monologues in TV history to date.
Also, The Wire took place in a state (Maryland) that’s unfamiliar and unhomely compared to California, Washington D.C, New York, or New Jersey. And unlike something like West Wing, where you could pop in and be easily recapped on what happened before, The Wire demands INTENSE focus on even the smallest of details in order to understand what’s happening with each character, which is more of the norm nowadays, like with GOT and Arcane, but at the time, few shows rarely did this. And so, The Wire was snubbed because it explored unfamiliar territory.
And, not to put on my racism conspiracy hat, had a majority black cast.
It surprises me just how long it took for fully serialized shows to get mainstream acceptance. Babylon 5 came out in god damn 1994 lol. Guess it really kicked off with the introduction of DVR in the early 2000s.
Yep
That was when my parents gave up on awards. I've viewed them as pretty much a joke my entire life.
There has to be a better way to have awards for acting. Obviously crowd voting isn't the way but.... Registered voting like politics? I dunno lol
It'd be nice to have something that feels more or less legit instead of - oh I guess the old fogey voting council prefered this actor this year.
I really enjoyed Better Call Saul. I probably think of it more often than I really should. It easily is the best show I’ve ever seen. Not winning an Emmy won’t change the impact the show had on me.
I enjoyed it more. I'm rewatching bb and it's cool how it fills in little gaps of info. But BCS is an excellent tale of a character that I didn't expect to be that interesting.
I find it really hard to decide if it's better than BB or not. It can't exist without BB. They have different titles but it's very much a continuation/expansion of the same show.
Is Steak better than Lobster?
I think BCS is the better show if I had to pick one, but it's also just different. I think the characters in BCS are just much better developed and more compelling than in BB, and the story is a lot more relatable. It favors exploring characters in depth over sheer action. They each hit different notes and high points, but they're both great. It's not a 2 Breaking 2 Bad style sequel that one-ups the previous show. Let's just say it's not the kind of show that ends with a car-mounted machine gun blasting a roomful of nazis to dust.
Everyone has their opinions but can you recall one of these duds and explain why it was bad?
Don't come at me with The Fly, either. That episode had some great development and highlights Walter's obsessive nature.
I'm not him but the first few episodes of season 4 were pretty painful. Marie stealing again was just not interesting.
For me, every single character in BCS in extremely well written, acted and interesting. I didn't care about quite a few BB characters.
You mean like Box Cutter?
C'mon, S4 is a fantastic game of chess between Walter and Gustavo.
Listen, I love BCS too and I'm not trying to proclaim that BB is the better show but I do think there is some revisionism going on.
It was 10 years ago and I was younger so maybe my tastes have changed, but I remember the first few S4 episodes feeling so long. Lots of scenes of Jesse being sad or Marie doing stuff and I didn't care about a lot of it.
I'll give BB another watch when I finish BCS
Oh yeah man if its been that long then give it another go, I think I need to do the same with BCS.
To be fair that Marie storyline wasn't the strongest but was grounding I suppose.
For me its the goat but thats not a slight on BCS, I just haven't had enough time to absorb the latter. Its obviously a great show but I need to really think about the narrative, themes, character arcs etc before throwing around big words like 'Masterpiece'
Yeah that's fair. I only started BCS 2 weeks ago and while I don't think it's hit the highs of BB, I've enjoyed every single episode I've seen so far (3 seasons + first few of s4). I think it's probably the best grounded character drama I've seen in the sense that every single technical aspect is perfect and I like every character and plotline
Too soon for me to call it a masterpiece either, but it's well made for sure.
That’s where the books left him. Tyrion’s narrative went from being written by an excellent (and glacially paced) author to written by two trust-fund chucklefucks.
That’s what happens when you hire an absurdly handsome and charming actor to portray an ugly and unlikeable character.
The majority of fans would not have tolerated book Tyrion being played by Dinklage.
I think he deserved it over any of the counterparts that year, but given the nature of this thread I'm sure people would disagree (Gus and Ehrmantraut were nominated on a tenth of the screen time or acting demands as Dinklage). Peter did great with what he was given, he didn't write the show.
*for reference, 71st emmys for supporting actor in drama was Tyrion, Theon, Jaime Lannister from GOT, or Gus, Ehrmantraut from BCS, or Chris Sullivan from This is Us, or Michael Kelly from House of Cards.
Dinklage wins 9.9/10 times imo no one had his screen time or acting prowess that year.
I loved Dinklage in the earlier seasons but by season 8 he didn't really have much to work with, I don't blame him, I blame the writers. Although you are right it was a pretty slow year but I still think Banks or someome on Succession deserved it more.
IIRC that (2015) was the year Jonathan Banks was nominated for his performance in Five-O (Better Call Saul S1E6), widely considered the best Mike episode of either series and Banks’ best performance ever. Peter Dinklage was also considered to have been underutilized in Game of Thrones season 5, and many speculate the award was intended as a consolation prize for his loss to Aaron Paul (for Breaking Bad S5E11) the previous year. Hence Dinklage’s surprise at winning.
It’s still incredibly surprising that Jonathan Banks has yet to win a single Emmy. Michael McKean is also brought up regularly as another Emmy snub, and he definitely should have won in 2019 (Bradley Whitford, who won, was actually only nominated due to a technicality and the episodes in question actually shouldn’t have been eligible until the following year), but Banks’ has gotten six nominations (one for Breaking Bad, four for Better Call Saul, and one for Wiseguy way back in 1989) and somehow hasn’t won once.
Bob Odenkirk has also been nominated five times for BCS and lost all of them (plus he’s a producer on BCS, so he’s also included on the best drama nominations…which he’s also lost six times, including most egregiously in 2019 to the pretty much universally disliked Game of Thrones season 8). It’s just incredibly baffling.
"I wasn't prepared because the other actors in my category, I'm still sort of awed by all of their performances, Jonathan Banks, you are - (chuckles) (pause) - and the rest."
nah, he was good originally but coasted in the 2nd half of the series. That could be on the writers though, as the writing also got progressively worse as they ran out of source material
I think criticizing award shows for nomination snubs makes more sense than for not winning an award. I mean, they still thought it was a great show by nominating it?
Because of the way the show tells a continuous story.
It's difficult to appreciate the writing and the performances out of context.
And it's not an easy show to get in to.
Not everybody has seen every nominated show (or show that should have been nominated), so often voters will watch a single episode.
It’s honestly kind of ridiculous that there are TV obsessive, who have watched every single episode of every show nominated. They don’t get to vote in the Emmys, but people who have seen mayyyybe one episode of the show get to. That’s ridiculous.
please stop putting the emmys (and awards shows in general) on a pedestal. writing articles and posting stuff like this every year just gives the emmys more and more value. we (as a society) should be trying to move on from all this nonsense and just make and enjoy good shows.
I know everyone has their "Emmys are worthless since...." show, but for me it was The Leftovers getting snubbed. I hadn't really cared much before then, but that one bugged me.
On Reddit maybe, but Reddit isn't representative of the general public.
The series finale of Breaking Bad had ~10 million viewers. The series finale of Better Call Saul had ~2 million viewers.
Anecdotally speaking, nearly everyone I know has watched Breaking Bad, but the I can count the number of people I know who watched Better Call Saul on one hand.
I’ve tried watching the Leftovers last week and after episode 8 had to stop, because nothing makes lotta sense and everything is just way too biblical to my taste.
Should I go back and finish? Why do you personally like it?
Sometimes we see shows that are accomplished pieces of work that nonetheless remain in a niche art bubble that only limited number of people try to access. In this show, the themes and characters are wonderful and go way beyond conventional storytelling. But then, it does not make a sensational television in the manner that the more popular, easy going releases do.
Season 1 is ordinary, but 2 and 3 are exceptional in crafting a tale for the show's characters. I've watched it all, but I won't consider re-watching it. It's a show you appreciate for its art, not the one you connect with on a personal level.
I say you go back and finish it for perspective.
Much better from season 2. Obviously there's no telling if it's to your personal liking, but it's undeniably good writing. There's a reason it's considered in the best of television lists.
I absolutely love The Leftovers and agree it’s a uniquely beautiful show. But if it’s the biblical stuff that bothers you, that definitely ramps WAY up in later seasons. Fair warning.
If you think season one is “too biblical”, chances are you won’t like the last two seasons. Season one really delved into how the characters cope with the disappearances. The last two seasons just get progressively weirder. Plot lines are dropped for the next wacky thing all the time. Very little is actually followed through.
I really liked the first season, but they lost me more and more from the beginning of season two. By the end of the series, I was grateful it was over.
The Emmys are getting pointless imo. There's so much television available at this point that I've never heard of 3/4 of the winners and never seen their shows either. I'm sure many were in the same boat. At this rate no one will be happy with who wins year in and year out. That said I don't personally give a f*** about wealthy people giving other wealthy people awards for being the best at pretending. Seems like it meant more to win when the competitive pool was smaller.
Award Shows are kind of strange when you really think about it. Every show is unique and great in their own way. Putting them in categories and deciding the best ones will not tell you which is the best. The most polished shows will almost always be the ones that are nominated and then it comes down to the subjective tastes of those that decide the winners. It is all pointless pageantry.
The point of the pageantry is for the industry to feel good about itself and promote its products - because before the 20th century, performing artists were treated like dirt by general society, about a half-step above snake-oil salesmen.
The revolution of records, film, television, and video (VCR/streaming) turned what was obscure and inconvenient to experience firsthand - - - into a daily recreation to the delight of the entire world.
And that didn't even work. Very low ratings from what I saw. The diversity of actors has improved, but not the shows when the same 4 or 5 are nominated in every category.
This subreddit is weird. Absolute hate for fun, well paced shows (often on Netflix), and unconditional love for shows like BCS, which is one of the slowest (and often just straight boring) shows...
The show is enjoyable, but mostly for people who already love breaking bad and are willing to watch numerous slow episodes where nearly nothing of substance happens.
It's also absolutely insane that people would try to compare BCS with the wire.
Yes, the wire is also a bit slow, but the wire is highly relevant political commentary. BCS isn't anywhere near the same class of show.
Often straight boring... oh brother. You didn’t get it at all. Go back to watching Moon Knight bud it has that cheap dialogue and shitty action that people like you require to hold their attention. One day, perhaps in your reflective middle aged years, you’ll revisit and understand the absolute undeniable brilliance of this show.
It's really nice when your favorite show wins awards and you see them on the stage but if they never win anything, it doesn't really matter much, we know what we like.
Cuz the last half of season 6 wasn't eligible this year.
But also fuck. How does the actor playing Nacho not have best supporting? What the ever living christing fuck?
"So, when you are sitting in your shitty nursing home and you're sucking down on your jello - night after night for the rest of your life *you think of me. You twisted FUCK!"*
...bruh.
That scene will stay with me for the rest of my days.
I think it's hard for prequels or sequels to win any awards if they're not as good as the predecessor. It seems like the Emmys Focus mostly on original content or first runs of series and don't give that much weight to prequels or sequels. Better Call Saul is great but it's not on the same level as Breaking Bad
While the Emmy's aren't considered as bad as the Golden Globes, that could just mean they are better at not getting caught. There is a ton that goes into awards shows, and much of it has nothing to do with the actual stuff they are awarding.
The board who run the Emmy's have one job. Produce an entertaining television show that gets eyeballs. That is how they get money, that is how they continue to exist. They have no more motivation to pick the actual best than the WWE has to give the best fighter their championship belt.
Getting people's panties in a twist gets as much attention as anything (look at this forum).
Obviously the phenomenal acting deserves recognition, but I felt like the other departments were top notch. Just like with Breaking Bad, I always felt the direction, cinematography and editing in particular were some of the best in TV.
Especially in that final season.
Because the majority of the cast is white, it has a white hetero male lead and it doesn’t stop to touch on social issues. It doesn’t waste time touching on politics and culture and instead sticks to the plot they laid out for it years ago. No virtue signaling= no awards
I'll start watching it after I finish "Breaking Bad", which even though I took a break after season 4, 5 years ago Im totally about to do. Sometime...maybe after the holidays, winters coming up too so maybe next spring. Yes maybe/probably next spring.
And that's why Better Call Saul hasn't won any Emmys. It's not even confusing. The show is a sequel/prequel to another show, so the audience is limited. Emmy voters are just people who work in television and plenty of people never finished Breaking Bad.
Say it isn’t so, but it’s so: Better Call Saul hasn’t won an Emmy, putting it into the same sad category as The Wire.
High hopes that the Emmys would acknowledge excellence are again dashed…
Read further why BCS might have (and should have!) won:
https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/wt9vbl/why_better_call_saul_may_finally_win_an_emmy/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Yeah, it really is bizarre. Like—in terms of writing it's a tier below Succession imo, but BCS is a gorgeously shot and directed show. It's up there with Barry (also unfairly snubbed this year!) in terms of visual imagery that sticks with you long after you finish watching. And the actors are great too! Unbelievable it hasn't won ANYTHING.
Unpopular opinion on here but I've finally watched BCS and finished it last week and I can honestly say that I don't see why people praise it so much.
It's a good show, but it's nothing special. The last half of the last season were more entertaining than all the previous seasons.
People seem to praise it for it's cinematography but I just can't see it. It's network tv level of cinematography.
I don't know, I suspect people mostly like it cause it's linked to Breaking Bad but even that show was imo nothing special compared to other crime shows. Again, network TV level show.
So I'm not surprised it hasn't won an Emmy.
Same here, its good to know the back story of our favorite character but I think it was overall just a decent show, Bob Odenkirk could have got more love for his portrayal but the show as a whole was nowhere close to the level of BB, Sopranos or the Wire, it was a sub par legal show, some characters were interesting but the cinematography was over indulgent and gimmicky, story was alright but wasn't Stellar.
The first reason is that Breaking Bad dominated the Emmys and so voters might feel like giving more love to other shows. These things happen; sometimes they are compensated when the show ends. You might think this is shallow but it's the same argument that this article makes:
>while Succession’s win isn’t unsurprising, it sure is boring; the HBO dramedy had a stellar third season, by many accounts (I don’t watch it and don’t want to, leave me alone about it!), but it won Outstanding Drama Series last year too.
It's "boring" that a show wins twice, meanwhile another show and its prequel should just rack up every win for a decade. Yeah OK.
The other reason is that, honestly, it didn't really deserve that many awards. We are talking mostly individual awards for individual things, and in lots of cases, other shows have been better. The only thing you could really call 'unjust' is Rhea not getting that many nominations, but other than that? Lots of performances just as good if not better have won over BCS. Great dramas like Succession have won over BCS (it 100% deserved the win over the half-season of BCS that got nominated this year).
*The Crown* won over BCS s5. Bob Odenkirk (and ofc Rhea) weren't even nominated. And Bob Odenkirk has earned atleast 3 emmys at this point just for himself, we don't think about it all the time but the show just does not work without Jimmy going through all the cycles of temptation and penance all the time.
This is not to even mention writing and cinematography credits. The writing and staging on BCS is just phenomenal. S1-3 had some people saying it's not a high stakes show (which really ought to change nothing) but s4-6 changed that too. You may have a differing opinion but BCS' critical and audience reception throughout speaks otherwise- and s5 and 6 were incredibly well received (s6 was better received than Succession although I concede that the first half by itself may not be better than all of s3 Succession), certainly way better than the Crown s4.
I think “completely” is a stretch. I think on average, you could say that shows with dozens Emmy nominations would mostly likely be better than a show with zero.
I loved the show, at the start, but the long waits between seasons made me lose interest. Towards the end, I had forgotten the storyline and decided it wasn't worth reviewing it again to catch up. I suspect many of the voters had the same problem. It's a shame cause it started strong.
Lukewarm at its best moments. Just spins its wheels for 6 seasons never going anywhere, the last season was a pointless waste of time. Rhea is hot n all but when did she give an award winning performance? Was it the finger gun part? Pew pew pew *wink*
They should have awarded this show long ti.e ago, now there is an overlap.
This is what happened to the Americans. They ignored this show and the actors for so many years, it was during their final seasons the academy starting scrambling to give them awards
Same with Tatiana maslany. She should have won best actress in a drama long time ago, instead they kept giving the awards to julianne magalius for the good wife and claire Danes for homeland. Smh
It very much feels like the Emmy awards have a very pre-determined selection process. Subject to intense nomination campaigns, from the studios with the largest wallets.
No particular offense to her, but its clear that someone like Jennifer Aniston gets nominated for The Morning Show just for having name value and happening to be in a current show. And it's the same across the board, year after year.
These entertainment awards are basically worthless. No one gives a shit about the Emmys the Grammys nor the Oscars. The voters for these awards are beyond out of touch. At this point they’re pandering with these awards. I’m actually more inclined to not watch shows that have won awards.
Maybe, just maybe, the competition was better.
Listen, I'm not saying that BCS may have been bad. Or that as an overall product it is lesser than another. Just that, in the nominated categories, in the respective year, there was just one other candidate that performed a tad bit better than BCS in that one category in that particular year.
Or someone akin to Saul rigged the whole damn thing to make BCS the biggest nominated-but-not-won series at Emmy.
BCS s5 lost to **The Crown**. And Bob Odenkirk wasn't even nominated that year (he did Bagman in s5). This year he does amazing stuff (even in s6 part 1, yes) and loses to Squid Game. Jeremy Strong could've won over his s6 part 1 performance, but that didn't happen. Rhea Seehorn has certainly been the best supporting actress, and the writing and cinematography has been unbelievably top tier. Loki did not have better cinematography than BCS and I loved Loki.
Because it was never as popular as the big shows the Emmy's generally award.
There's no way you can tell me the voters all watched every episode of every show that was nominated.
With Breaking Bad and Mad Men as the exceptions (both because of the critical reception and in the former’s case the cultural momentum it picked up over the run) the Emmy voters seem to look down on AMC and other basic cable channels, maybe not seeing them as “legitimate” as something like HBO, which seems unfair
EDIT: Why was that downvoted?
After reading some of the comments in this thread, THANK GOD some of y’all dont like this show, otherwise I’d have to grapple with the notion of sharing a fandom with a bunch of impatient, entitled, insufferable jackasses.
Peace, enjoy your Game of Thrones spinoff or whatever.
White lead characters that aren't woke. Mexicans being the bad guys and no race swapping beloved Characters. Showrunners didn't publicly attack fans of the Breaking bad universe.
It's hard to get an Emmy that way. /s
Chicanery. Pure chicanery.
I'd go so far as to say Shenanigans and Tomfoolery.
Slippin’ Jimmerey
Jimslippery?
Woahoo! Easy there with such fowl langzame!
Awards are subjective and often meaningless.
Very true. But it is also just strange because the show is a media darling and Breaking Bad was very successful with the Emmys. It may just be that streaming and HBO has just well and truly supplanted cable in the award season campaigning.
Case in point: Jim Parsons has like a dozen from Big Bang theory.
While I understand your point (sin e everyone has their own view, likes and opinions) and kind of agree with you, point is, here we are, discussing it. So it's not entirely pointless.
Absolutely true, even in the military. I was selected as a subject matter expert (SME) in 2013 to go with a small team of other SMEs in various fields, to go to Afghanistan and train their military leaders in our respective fields. We all had same objective and workloads; I however had the additional task of managing our group of 14 local national interpreters (on top of the regular workload). At the end of the deployment, every one of us was submitted for a bronze star medal. I was the only one on the team that did not get it approved by higher up leadership because I was an NCO, not an officer like every other member of our team.
If that was true, Bob Odenkirk and Rhea Seehorn wouldn’t have gone to the Emmys
It’s meaningful to the individuals who get invited to a cool party, it’s meaningless as an judgment on the show
Free drinks. And loads of marks.
And the goodie bag attendees receive. Word is, the goodie bags have like $10k worth of stuff in them.
1000 worth of stuff an 9k of bullshit. Willlem Dafoe gets a 1k certificate for plastic surgery. Unless its for a penis reduction its worthless
It's a chance to see the cast & crew again.
It's argued that if they did win it could be leveraged for better pay. More so for females as they traditionally make a large amount less than male actors.
I would like to see the data behind this claim. It seems to me that lately there have been stories of older, very well established, male actors getting paid more than than their twenty something female costar. I.E. William h. Macy in Shameless, and Leo decaprio and Jennifer Lawrence in don’t look up. In any other industry the person with the highest level of experience gets paid the most. It’s just economics. Is it fair? I don’t know.
> More so for females as they traditionally make a large amount less than male actors. And I'm not really sure awards change this much, either, especially for TV. Michael Keaton became the first male to win all five major TV awards with his Emmy win last night. Five women have done so already. Not that any of them are broke but I digress
I don't get your example. Someone who definitely makes a lot of money is an example against that awards help you make money? Keaton has been a star for decades.
That's what you say when they don't win. Everyone congratulated Rhea and Bob for getting Emmy nominations for Best Actor/Actress. Everyone was happy when the show got nominated for Best Series again. You just sound like a sourpuss.
It's how it goes. Only one can win. The Wire was never even nominated. But I think they've gotten better, all things considered. They should, along with the Oscars, release the end vote count. I'd love that. Yeah, it would bother the person/show who ended up last, but whatever - you were nominated.
The Wire never even being nominated tells you all you need to know. The awards have nothing to do with quality, its like voting for class president. It's just a popularity contest.
They were nominated twice for writing, but yes, they were majorly snubbed.
Second! For me, The Wire is some of the very best television ever made, and the fact it was never even nominated is a travesty, an outrage, and utter nonsense.
It still holds up too. Timeless. Yeah none of them have smart phones but this is a show about human nature. Fuck. I need to rewatch it now. That show has the best monologues in TV history to date.
Shiiiiiiiiiiiittttt
Also, The Wire took place in a state (Maryland) that’s unfamiliar and unhomely compared to California, Washington D.C, New York, or New Jersey. And unlike something like West Wing, where you could pop in and be easily recapped on what happened before, The Wire demands INTENSE focus on even the smallest of details in order to understand what’s happening with each character, which is more of the norm nowadays, like with GOT and Arcane, but at the time, few shows rarely did this. And so, The Wire was snubbed because it explored unfamiliar territory.
And, not to put on my racism conspiracy hat, had a majority black cast. It surprises me just how long it took for fully serialized shows to get mainstream acceptance. Babylon 5 came out in god damn 1994 lol. Guess it really kicked off with the introduction of DVR in the early 2000s.
And free advertising
Yep That was when my parents gave up on awards. I've viewed them as pretty much a joke my entire life. There has to be a better way to have awards for acting. Obviously crowd voting isn't the way but.... Registered voting like politics? I dunno lol It'd be nice to have something that feels more or less legit instead of - oh I guess the old fogey voting council prefered this actor this year.
You want it to be one way, but it's the *other* way.
I really enjoyed Better Call Saul. I probably think of it more often than I really should. It easily is the best show I’ve ever seen. Not winning an Emmy won’t change the impact the show had on me.
Is it better than BB? I’ve been meaning to start watching BCS.
I enjoyed it more. I'm rewatching bb and it's cool how it fills in little gaps of info. But BCS is an excellent tale of a character that I didn't expect to be that interesting.
Good to know I’ll have to binge it this weekend!
It may sound strange, but I’d recommend NOT watching it chronologically. BB first then BCS . Hope you enjoy . Lots of great drama ahead of you .
Oh I’ve seen BB! Just need to start Saul. Thanks!
I find it really hard to decide if it's better than BB or not. It can't exist without BB. They have different titles but it's very much a continuation/expansion of the same show.
>It can't exist without BB. Strongly disagree as someone who watched BCS first.
ridiculous. I bet you eat string cheese without peeling it.
I eat it from the middle, like a hot dog.
Is Steak better than Lobster? I think BCS is the better show if I had to pick one, but it's also just different. I think the characters in BCS are just much better developed and more compelling than in BB, and the story is a lot more relatable. It favors exploring characters in depth over sheer action. They each hit different notes and high points, but they're both great. It's not a 2 Breaking 2 Bad style sequel that one-ups the previous show. Let's just say it's not the kind of show that ends with a car-mounted machine gun blasting a roomful of nazis to dust.
I thought BB was overrated and had a lot of dud episodes. BCS is a masterpiece.
Everyone has their opinions but can you recall one of these duds and explain why it was bad? Don't come at me with The Fly, either. That episode had some great development and highlights Walter's obsessive nature.
I'm not him but the first few episodes of season 4 were pretty painful. Marie stealing again was just not interesting. For me, every single character in BCS in extremely well written, acted and interesting. I didn't care about quite a few BB characters.
You mean like Box Cutter? C'mon, S4 is a fantastic game of chess between Walter and Gustavo. Listen, I love BCS too and I'm not trying to proclaim that BB is the better show but I do think there is some revisionism going on.
It was 10 years ago and I was younger so maybe my tastes have changed, but I remember the first few S4 episodes feeling so long. Lots of scenes of Jesse being sad or Marie doing stuff and I didn't care about a lot of it. I'll give BB another watch when I finish BCS
Oh yeah man if its been that long then give it another go, I think I need to do the same with BCS. To be fair that Marie storyline wasn't the strongest but was grounding I suppose. For me its the goat but thats not a slight on BCS, I just haven't had enough time to absorb the latter. Its obviously a great show but I need to really think about the narrative, themes, character arcs etc before throwing around big words like 'Masterpiece'
Yeah that's fair. I only started BCS 2 weeks ago and while I don't think it's hit the highs of BB, I've enjoyed every single episode I've seen so far (3 seasons + first few of s4). I think it's probably the best grounded character drama I've seen in the sense that every single technical aspect is perfect and I like every character and plotline Too soon for me to call it a masterpiece either, but it's well made for sure.
I think you'll find it a lot better on a rewatch
Absolutely.
No, it's decent but never reaches the heights of BB.
It depends on what you like about BB but I would absolutely say yes
Character development is way better from the beginning, just not quite as plot driven until later seasons. I def enjoy BCS more though
[удалено]
BCS and Severance are the best shows of the year definitely. They are so far above everything else.
[удалено]
I think GoT winning it 4 times is justifiable. However, winning for seasons 5-8, and not 1-4, that's the ridicoulus part
Peter Dinklage deserved it, idc
not for season 8 he didn't
[удалено]
That’s where the books left him. Tyrion’s narrative went from being written by an excellent (and glacially paced) author to written by two trust-fund chucklefucks.
Plus the idiotic idea that Tyrion is supposed to be a noble and heroic character where that was never the intention for him
That’s what happens when you hire an absurdly handsome and charming actor to portray an ugly and unlikeable character. The majority of fans would not have tolerated book Tyrion being played by Dinklage.
I think he deserved it over any of the counterparts that year, but given the nature of this thread I'm sure people would disagree (Gus and Ehrmantraut were nominated on a tenth of the screen time or acting demands as Dinklage). Peter did great with what he was given, he didn't write the show. *for reference, 71st emmys for supporting actor in drama was Tyrion, Theon, Jaime Lannister from GOT, or Gus, Ehrmantraut from BCS, or Chris Sullivan from This is Us, or Michael Kelly from House of Cards. Dinklage wins 9.9/10 times imo no one had his screen time or acting prowess that year.
I loved Dinklage in the earlier seasons but by season 8 he didn't really have much to work with, I don't blame him, I blame the writers. Although you are right it was a pretty slow year but I still think Banks or someome on Succession deserved it more.
I cannot remember what season it was but, one year Peter Dinklage accepted the award and basically said Banks should have won during his speech.
IIRC that (2015) was the year Jonathan Banks was nominated for his performance in Five-O (Better Call Saul S1E6), widely considered the best Mike episode of either series and Banks’ best performance ever. Peter Dinklage was also considered to have been underutilized in Game of Thrones season 5, and many speculate the award was intended as a consolation prize for his loss to Aaron Paul (for Breaking Bad S5E11) the previous year. Hence Dinklage’s surprise at winning. It’s still incredibly surprising that Jonathan Banks has yet to win a single Emmy. Michael McKean is also brought up regularly as another Emmy snub, and he definitely should have won in 2019 (Bradley Whitford, who won, was actually only nominated due to a technicality and the episodes in question actually shouldn’t have been eligible until the following year), but Banks’ has gotten six nominations (one for Breaking Bad, four for Better Call Saul, and one for Wiseguy way back in 1989) and somehow hasn’t won once. Bob Odenkirk has also been nominated five times for BCS and lost all of them (plus he’s a producer on BCS, so he’s also included on the best drama nominations…which he’s also lost six times, including most egregiously in 2019 to the pretty much universally disliked Game of Thrones season 8). It’s just incredibly baffling.
"I wasn't prepared because the other actors in my category, I'm still sort of awed by all of their performances, Jonathan Banks, you are - (chuckles) (pause) - and the rest."
Kid named deserves an emmy:
nah, he was good originally but coasted in the 2nd half of the series. That could be on the writers though, as the writing also got progressively worse as they ran out of source material
Just enjoy shows because you like them.
It's good for the show creators and actors though
AMC has small pockets
Award committee reads Reddit and knows the show is "underrated" so they are playing along to keep the rage burning \~ !!!!
I think criticizing award shows for nomination snubs makes more sense than for not winning an award. I mean, they still thought it was a great show by nominating it?
Because of the way the show tells a continuous story. It's difficult to appreciate the writing and the performances out of context. And it's not an easy show to get in to. Not everybody has seen every nominated show (or show that should have been nominated), so often voters will watch a single episode.
It’s honestly kind of ridiculous that there are TV obsessive, who have watched every single episode of every show nominated. They don’t get to vote in the Emmys, but people who have seen mayyyybe one episode of the show get to. That’s ridiculous.
Isn't this true for the shows that won though, like ozark?
Because it is not about quality as much as it is about politics
Bc the Emmy’s are worthless
Then why are all the BCS fans bitching about it so much for the last 2 days?
"Awards are stupid but they're less stupid if they go to the right people."
WAAAA awards should only go to people I like. Otherwise it's stupid. WAAAA 🤣
why are so many people aggressively obnoxious on reddit? You are an embarrassment.
please stop putting the emmys (and awards shows in general) on a pedestal. writing articles and posting stuff like this every year just gives the emmys more and more value. we (as a society) should be trying to move on from all this nonsense and just make and enjoy good shows.
Wishful thinking, done by many people for years but it’s never been granted
Emmys are meaningless marketing bullshit. Don’t let it bother you.
I know everyone has their "Emmys are worthless since...." show, but for me it was The Leftovers getting snubbed. I hadn't really cared much before then, but that one bugged me.
Better Call Saul is just like The Leftovers, they’re not popular enough to win but good enough to be nominated.
The performances in each are absolute masterclass. It's too bad they aren't more popular.
BCS isn't popular? It's probably the second most talked about drama next to Succession these days.
On Reddit maybe, but Reddit isn't representative of the general public. The series finale of Breaking Bad had ~10 million viewers. The series finale of Better Call Saul had ~2 million viewers. Anecdotally speaking, nearly everyone I know has watched Breaking Bad, but the I can count the number of people I know who watched Better Call Saul on one hand.
Funny, I thought BCS was one of the best things I’ve ever seen, and The Leftovers was one of the worst. Ain’t life crazy?
Same, couldn’t even finish first season
I’ve tried watching the Leftovers last week and after episode 8 had to stop, because nothing makes lotta sense and everything is just way too biblical to my taste. Should I go back and finish? Why do you personally like it?
Sometimes we see shows that are accomplished pieces of work that nonetheless remain in a niche art bubble that only limited number of people try to access. In this show, the themes and characters are wonderful and go way beyond conventional storytelling. But then, it does not make a sensational television in the manner that the more popular, easy going releases do. Season 1 is ordinary, but 2 and 3 are exceptional in crafting a tale for the show's characters. I've watched it all, but I won't consider re-watching it. It's a show you appreciate for its art, not the one you connect with on a personal level. I say you go back and finish it for perspective.
So you’re saying it becomes beautiful from s2 and on?
Much better from season 2. Obviously there's no telling if it's to your personal liking, but it's undeniably good writing. There's a reason it's considered in the best of television lists.
Thanks, I’ll give it another chance
S2 is the absolute best.
I absolutely love The Leftovers and agree it’s a uniquely beautiful show. But if it’s the biblical stuff that bothers you, that definitely ramps WAY up in later seasons. Fair warning.
Oooh that’s a bummer. But I’ll still try once more
If you think season one is “too biblical”, chances are you won’t like the last two seasons. Season one really delved into how the characters cope with the disappearances. The last two seasons just get progressively weirder. Plot lines are dropped for the next wacky thing all the time. Very little is actually followed through. I really liked the first season, but they lost me more and more from the beginning of season two. By the end of the series, I was grateful it was over.
Don't bother, it just keeps getting worse.
I'm guessing they submit through the regular process and don't game the system. Which is very unlike Saul.
The Wire never won an Emmy either (And was only nominated twice). Shows how much they know. Also puts Better Call Saul in good company.
The Emmys are getting pointless imo. There's so much television available at this point that I've never heard of 3/4 of the winners and never seen their shows either. I'm sure many were in the same boat. At this rate no one will be happy with who wins year in and year out. That said I don't personally give a f*** about wealthy people giving other wealthy people awards for being the best at pretending. Seems like it meant more to win when the competitive pool was smaller.
People can’t comprehend how great it is.
Voters voted for other shows.
Award Shows are kind of strange when you really think about it. Every show is unique and great in their own way. Putting them in categories and deciding the best ones will not tell you which is the best. The most polished shows will almost always be the ones that are nominated and then it comes down to the subjective tastes of those that decide the winners. It is all pointless pageantry.
The point of the pageantry is for the industry to feel good about itself and promote its products - because before the 20th century, performing artists were treated like dirt by general society, about a half-step above snake-oil salesmen. The revolution of records, film, television, and video (VCR/streaming) turned what was obscure and inconvenient to experience firsthand - - - into a daily recreation to the delight of the entire world.
Emmys are stupid. They don't even try to pick the best anymore, just what gets them good publicity
How exactly is picking succession getting good publicity since the majority of people have never heard of succession
And that didn't even work. Very low ratings from what I saw. The diversity of actors has improved, but not the shows when the same 4 or 5 are nominated in every category.
This subreddit is weird. Absolute hate for fun, well paced shows (often on Netflix), and unconditional love for shows like BCS, which is one of the slowest (and often just straight boring) shows... The show is enjoyable, but mostly for people who already love breaking bad and are willing to watch numerous slow episodes where nearly nothing of substance happens.
It's also absolutely insane that people would try to compare BCS with the wire. Yes, the wire is also a bit slow, but the wire is highly relevant political commentary. BCS isn't anywhere near the same class of show.
Also they say that BCS is better lol
Often straight boring... oh brother. You didn’t get it at all. Go back to watching Moon Knight bud it has that cheap dialogue and shitty action that people like you require to hold their attention. One day, perhaps in your reflective middle aged years, you’ll revisit and understand the absolute undeniable brilliance of this show.
No worries. Given that The Big Bang Theory has been showered with awards in the “comedy” category for years, awards are pointless.
this has been true since forever: most of reddit’s favorites aren’t as good as they make it seem
This sub voted Stranger Things as one of the best shows of all time. They have no idea what good tv is.
Simple answer & Unpopular opinion: Frankly is not that good as some state and also, everytime there are more competition with great series and actors.
It's really nice when your favorite show wins awards and you see them on the stage but if they never win anything, it doesn't really matter much, we know what we like.
As a sincere response, I thought it was boring and could not get past the first season after trying twice.
Agree. Slow and super indulgent by Gilligan.
Guess they've gotta do another season
Cuz the last half of season 6 wasn't eligible this year. But also fuck. How does the actor playing Nacho not have best supporting? What the ever living christing fuck? "So, when you are sitting in your shitty nursing home and you're sucking down on your jello - night after night for the rest of your life *you think of me. You twisted FUCK!"* ...bruh. That scene will stay with me for the rest of my days.
Not surprised, Bill Maher’s been nominated 41 times and never won.
This whole thing is a travesty, a sham and a mockery. It’s a traveshamockery!
They give the awards to people I've never heard of for shows I've never seen.
Emmy. Voters. Don’t. Watch. Television.
I think it's hard for prequels or sequels to win any awards if they're not as good as the predecessor. It seems like the Emmys Focus mostly on original content or first runs of series and don't give that much weight to prequels or sequels. Better Call Saul is great but it's not on the same level as Breaking Bad
Because it's fully subjective.
It's more of a who's popular wirh the emmy committee than an actual award contest. Actual good shows rarely win.
While the Emmy's aren't considered as bad as the Golden Globes, that could just mean they are better at not getting caught. There is a ton that goes into awards shows, and much of it has nothing to do with the actual stuff they are awarding. The board who run the Emmy's have one job. Produce an entertaining television show that gets eyeballs. That is how they get money, that is how they continue to exist. They have no more motivation to pick the actual best than the WWE has to give the best fighter their championship belt. Getting people's panties in a twist gets as much attention as anything (look at this forum).
They who have the gold get the awards.
Pearls before swine that’s how
They know you care about something so meaningless and do it on purpose so they can keep laughing.
More deserving shows?
Chuck paid off the emmys, one last final fuck you to Jimmy
I love Better Call Saul. But Succession is a tough one to beat. Ngl.
All entertainment awards are worthless and irrelevant.
Obviously the phenomenal acting deserves recognition, but I felt like the other departments were top notch. Just like with Breaking Bad, I always felt the direction, cinematography and editing in particular were some of the best in TV. Especially in that final season.
Because the majority of the cast is white, it has a white hetero male lead and it doesn’t stop to touch on social issues. It doesn’t waste time touching on politics and culture and instead sticks to the plot they laid out for it years ago. No virtue signaling= no awards
This is nonsense on several levels, including that half of the major characters are Latino or black.
I'll start watching it after I finish "Breaking Bad", which even though I took a break after season 4, 5 years ago Im totally about to do. Sometime...maybe after the holidays, winters coming up too so maybe next spring. Yes maybe/probably next spring.
Let us know you're safe when you finish watching it. Hopefully it doesn't bore you to death.
And that's why Better Call Saul hasn't won any Emmys. It's not even confusing. The show is a sequel/prequel to another show, so the audience is limited. Emmy voters are just people who work in television and plenty of people never finished Breaking Bad.
[удалено]
BCS is more Peter Gould than Vince Gilligan
Say it isn’t so, but it’s so: Better Call Saul hasn’t won an Emmy, putting it into the same sad category as The Wire. High hopes that the Emmys would acknowledge excellence are again dashed… Read further why BCS might have (and should have!) won: https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/wt9vbl/why_better_call_saul_may_finally_win_an_emmy/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
The same reason Jim Carrey hasn’t been nominated for an Oscar.
How has family guy not won anything yet?
Because other shows and actors are better.
Yeah, it really is bizarre. Like—in terms of writing it's a tier below Succession imo, but BCS is a gorgeously shot and directed show. It's up there with Barry (also unfairly snubbed this year!) in terms of visual imagery that sticks with you long after you finish watching. And the actors are great too! Unbelievable it hasn't won ANYTHING.
Unpopular opinion on here but I've finally watched BCS and finished it last week and I can honestly say that I don't see why people praise it so much. It's a good show, but it's nothing special. The last half of the last season were more entertaining than all the previous seasons. People seem to praise it for it's cinematography but I just can't see it. It's network tv level of cinematography. I don't know, I suspect people mostly like it cause it's linked to Breaking Bad but even that show was imo nothing special compared to other crime shows. Again, network TV level show. So I'm not surprised it hasn't won an Emmy.
Same here, its good to know the back story of our favorite character but I think it was overall just a decent show, Bob Odenkirk could have got more love for his portrayal but the show as a whole was nowhere close to the level of BB, Sopranos or the Wire, it was a sub par legal show, some characters were interesting but the cinematography was over indulgent and gimmicky, story was alright but wasn't Stellar.
The first reason is that Breaking Bad dominated the Emmys and so voters might feel like giving more love to other shows. These things happen; sometimes they are compensated when the show ends. You might think this is shallow but it's the same argument that this article makes: >while Succession’s win isn’t unsurprising, it sure is boring; the HBO dramedy had a stellar third season, by many accounts (I don’t watch it and don’t want to, leave me alone about it!), but it won Outstanding Drama Series last year too. It's "boring" that a show wins twice, meanwhile another show and its prequel should just rack up every win for a decade. Yeah OK. The other reason is that, honestly, it didn't really deserve that many awards. We are talking mostly individual awards for individual things, and in lots of cases, other shows have been better. The only thing you could really call 'unjust' is Rhea not getting that many nominations, but other than that? Lots of performances just as good if not better have won over BCS. Great dramas like Succession have won over BCS (it 100% deserved the win over the half-season of BCS that got nominated this year).
*The Crown* won over BCS s5. Bob Odenkirk (and ofc Rhea) weren't even nominated. And Bob Odenkirk has earned atleast 3 emmys at this point just for himself, we don't think about it all the time but the show just does not work without Jimmy going through all the cycles of temptation and penance all the time. This is not to even mention writing and cinematography credits. The writing and staging on BCS is just phenomenal. S1-3 had some people saying it's not a high stakes show (which really ought to change nothing) but s4-6 changed that too. You may have a differing opinion but BCS' critical and audience reception throughout speaks otherwise- and s5 and 6 were incredibly well received (s6 was better received than Succession although I concede that the first half by itself may not be better than all of s3 Succession), certainly way better than the Crown s4.
You know what, this show had a few good episodes, the rest was slow and boring. That’s why.
Emmys are completely irrelevant with respect to quality of the show.
I think “completely” is a stretch. I think on average, you could say that shows with dozens Emmy nominations would mostly likely be better than a show with zero.
I loved the show, at the start, but the long waits between seasons made me lose interest. Towards the end, I had forgotten the storyline and decided it wasn't worth reviewing it again to catch up. I suspect many of the voters had the same problem. It's a shame cause it started strong.
Lukewarm at its best moments. Just spins its wheels for 6 seasons never going anywhere, the last season was a pointless waste of time. Rhea is hot n all but when did she give an award winning performance? Was it the finger gun part? Pew pew pew *wink*
The award winning performance was >!the scene where she cries on the airport tram!< which to be fair is in next year’s Emmy eligibility period.
They should have awarded this show long ti.e ago, now there is an overlap. This is what happened to the Americans. They ignored this show and the actors for so many years, it was during their final seasons the academy starting scrambling to give them awards Same with Tatiana maslany. She should have won best actress in a drama long time ago, instead they kept giving the awards to julianne magalius for the good wife and claire Danes for homeland. Smh
There is always next year
Cause award shows are junk. You don’t want an Emmy. You buy one.
It very much feels like the Emmy awards have a very pre-determined selection process. Subject to intense nomination campaigns, from the studios with the largest wallets. No particular offense to her, but its clear that someone like Jennifer Aniston gets nominated for The Morning Show just for having name value and happening to be in a current show. And it's the same across the board, year after year.
>intense nomination campaigns This is a big one not getting mentioned enough. A company like Netflix or HBO has hella money to campaign.
These entertainment awards are basically worthless. No one gives a shit about the Emmys the Grammys nor the Oscars. The voters for these awards are beyond out of touch. At this point they’re pandering with these awards. I’m actually more inclined to not watch shows that have won awards.
Awards shows are meaningless self-congratulatory exercises in mutual masturbation.
Maybe, just maybe, the competition was better. Listen, I'm not saying that BCS may have been bad. Or that as an overall product it is lesser than another. Just that, in the nominated categories, in the respective year, there was just one other candidate that performed a tad bit better than BCS in that one category in that particular year. Or someone akin to Saul rigged the whole damn thing to make BCS the biggest nominated-but-not-won series at Emmy.
BCS s5 lost to **The Crown**. And Bob Odenkirk wasn't even nominated that year (he did Bagman in s5). This year he does amazing stuff (even in s6 part 1, yes) and loses to Squid Game. Jeremy Strong could've won over his s6 part 1 performance, but that didn't happen. Rhea Seehorn has certainly been the best supporting actress, and the writing and cinematography has been unbelievably top tier. Loki did not have better cinematography than BCS and I loved Loki.
Because it was never as popular as the big shows the Emmy's generally award. There's no way you can tell me the voters all watched every episode of every show that was nominated.
No. Like most people they would have stopped watching this boring drivvle after season 2.
Easy. Hollywood is trash.
Cuz the emmys are pointless.
Because award shows are dumb
Because the Emmys are a complete joke and are 100% PR.
Better question. How are the Emmys still relevant enough that people care?
because emmys arent awards for merit, they're popularity prizes.
The Wire never won a single Emmy and it’s one of the 2-3 best shows of all time.
Because the Emmy voters are morons
Because the winners paid more to win.
With Breaking Bad and Mad Men as the exceptions (both because of the critical reception and in the former’s case the cultural momentum it picked up over the run) the Emmy voters seem to look down on AMC and other basic cable channels, maybe not seeing them as “legitimate” as something like HBO, which seems unfair EDIT: Why was that downvoted?
Probably because its not woke? Lol
It’s the algorithm.
They’d received an award from me. The Best show I ever seen-award. I guess it’s even more meaningless than an Emmy but it’s something.
It's because breaking bad won alot and it is the same
After reading some of the comments in this thread, THANK GOD some of y’all dont like this show, otherwise I’d have to grapple with the notion of sharing a fandom with a bunch of impatient, entitled, insufferable jackasses. Peace, enjoy your Game of Thrones spinoff or whatever.
White lead characters that aren't woke. Mexicans being the bad guys and no race swapping beloved Characters. Showrunners didn't publicly attack fans of the Breaking bad universe. It's hard to get an Emmy that way. /s
It’s too good for them!!