36 minutes ago, Melroser said:

Why are we back in high school? Let's move on people and talk about AW not each other. 

Sure thing. You're right. I think we do better when we post about the topic at hand. Thanks for that nudge. 

I wish it were possible to run polls here. Just did the Love/Hudson twins elsewhere. Upfront it's accepted that the Marley wig is hated. And, no one votes for Rhonda Lewen. Then:

Who is your favorite "Just Marley"?

Who is your favorite "Just Vicky"?

Who is your favorite playing both?

If anyone chooses to say I will make note of replies. 

My answers are: Ellen Wheeler, Anne Heche, Anne Heche. 

1 hour ago, chrisml said:

Thank you @kalbir for a concise of nominations/wins for AW.

You're welcome @chrisml 

1 minute ago, kalbir said:

You're welcome @chrisml 

I loved that comprehensive post you made last week!!!

8 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

I loved that comprehensive post you made last week!!!

Thank you.

12 hours ago, kalbir said:

Another World at the Daytime Emmys

Wins

Irene Dailey: Lead Actress 1979

Charles Keating: Lead Actor 1996

Anna Holbrook: Supporting Actress 1996

The things that stand out to me. 

No win for Victoria Wyndham. 

No win for Beverlee McKinsey. (And, at GL she did not allow herself to be submitted, so that is a totality situation.)

When Irene Dailey won for Aunt Liz up against both VW & Bev, it is the year I believe that Bev talks about in the CITY LIGHTS Interview where as soon as the Emmys were over she & VW went together to the first possible establishment & asked for a table with some privacy & liquor & talked for some time. Imagine being a fly on that wall. 

1996 when CK & Anna K. Holbrook won they were both let go so the joke was, "Win an Emmy but Lose your regular gig!"

 

I think there was some controversy over Laurie Heineman win in 1978 and that lead to the creation of the supporting categories the following year.

7 minutes ago, kalbir said:

I think there was some controversy over Laurie Heineman win in 1978 and that lead to the creation of the supporting categories the following year.

Two different people told me last week that someone complained after 2018 & that was why/when they stopped releasing the reels to the public, which to me is an ugh. Loved getting to see them. 

9 minutes ago, kalbir said:

I think there was some controversy over Laurie Heineman win in 1978 and that lead to the creation of the supporting categories the following year.

In your opinion does the ever evolving qualification system enhance or detract from the legitimacy of the awards (which admitted already has a pretty low threshold for validity in honoring the "best" at anything)? 

I can see it both ways.  It's good to adapt, but not at the expense of reliable criteria.  

2 minutes ago, kalbir said:

I think there was some controversy over Laurie Heineman win in 1978 and that lead to the creation of the supporting categories the following year.

Yes, the idea that Laurie Heineman was one of AW's lead actresses in 1978 was, at best, questionable.  I would submit that the four lead actresses of AW in 1978 were Vicki Wyndham, Susan Harney, Beverlee McKinsey, and Beverly Penberthy. And only Wyndham and McKinsey got Emmy worthy material to play that year.  Hineman was a supporting actress, in my opinion.  

I can say the same thing about Irene Dailey winning lead actress in 1979. During Dailey's entire run on AW, Liz Matthews was never a lead.  I'm not sure even Audra Lindley's Liz would have been considered a lead in the 1960s.  I loved Aunt Liz.  And Irene Dailey was an amazing actor.  But Liz was not a lead role.   

Just now, j swift said:

In your opinion does the ever evolving qualification system enhance or detract from the legitimacy of the awards (which admitted already has a pretty low threshold for validity in honoring the "best" at anything)? 

I can see it both ways.  It's good to adapt, but not at the expense of reliable criteria.  

I think the biggest shift in the qualifying system was the creation of the younger categories and their eventual age limit. I feel the younger categories were created so that newcomers wouldn't overshadow long-tenured veterans and with the age limit, it made the supporting categories a holding tank for those who aged out of the younger categories but were not at long-tenured veteran level or at superstar level to be nominated for the lead categories.

No other awards have a category with an age limit and that in a way detracts from the legitimacy of the awards. IMO the results of the younger categories from the mid-1990s to the end showed how much the talent pool in daytime dropped during that era.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Tisy-Lish said:

Yes, the idea that Laurie Heineman was one of AW's lead actresses in 1978 was, at best, questionable.  I would submit that the four lead actresses of AW in 1978 were Vicki Wyndham, Susan Harney, Beverlee McKinsey, and Beverly Penberthy. And only Wyndham and McKinsey got Emmy worthy material to play that year.  Hineman was a supporting actress, in my opinion.  

I can say the same thing about Irene Dailey winning lead actress in 1979. During Dailey's entire run on AW, Liz Matthews was never a lead.  I'm not sure even Audra Lindley's Liz would have been considered a lead in the 1960s.  I loved Aunt Liz.  And Irene Dailey was an amazing actor.  But Liz was not a lead role.   

100% Co-sign!!!

36 minutes ago, kalbir said:

No other awards have a category with an age limit and that in a way detracts from the legitimacy of the awards. IMO the results of the younger categories from the mid-1990s to the end showed how much the talent pool in daytime dropped during that era.

I, for one, thought that Cary Christopher, who plays Thomas DiMera on DAYS, should have won last go-round & yes, I do like Eden. He's just IMO a really talented little guy. Whenever, or if, DAYS is done with him, I hope he lands on another soap. If they wanted to slightly SORAS Wiley on GH, he would be excellent & he looks like Rory!

1 hour ago, kalbir said:

No other awards have a category with an age limit and that in a way detracts from the legitimacy of the awards. IMO the results of the younger categories from the mid-1990s to the end showed how much the talent pool in daytime dropped during that era.

I hope that if awards have to carry on, we'll say the same thing about gender-based awards in a few years. Imagine the possibilities of awarding acting based on categories inherent to soaps. For example, best acting in a dramatic monologue. Not the best villain or best body like the Soapys.  But, criterion based categories that have more meaning than the presence or absence of an XY chromosome.  

If they stopped pretending, there is a divide based on how men and women act that necessitates the need to reward two men and two women from the all the soaps.  Then, many more quirky, dramatic, and heroic characters might have been recognized.  

Edited July 19Jul 19 by j swift

I don't watch any of the current soaps, so I can't comment on the current nominees or any changes that should/shouldn't be made based on the shows.  When I saw the nominees, my only thought was, "Wow, this is the best daytime has to offer?" I wouldn't trust this voting body to come up with new categories/new rules.  The Primetime Emmys are nearly as bad with their rubber stamping of a small handful of shows. 

In regards to AW, I have mentioned Carmen Duncan during the Chief storyline, but I would also add Anna Stuart to the list for her years on the show. She's did wonderful work. Denise Alexander has some strong stuff as well. I liked Jane Cameron a lot. Alicia Coppola was also robbed of Emmy nominations when lesser actresses got into the younger actress category. Stephen Schnetzer, Sally Spencer, Nancy Francione, etc. 

18 minutes ago, chrisml said:

In regards to AW, I have mentioned Carmen Duncan during the Chief storyline

The fact that she wasn't nominated for the scenes of Iris confessing everything to Mac was ridiculous.