Jump to content

Did it ever annoy you that actors who were leads would put themselves in supporting


SamandWillowFan

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Yeah, category fraud. I’m sure it was in deference to (or to avoid competition with) the more tenured marquee stars. Not sure if SL was still submitting throughout the 2000s. AM did get a Lead nod for Kendall in 2011 (alongside Debbi Morgan) but lost to Laura Wright.

Back in the day, it often felt like Lead vs. Supporting was more about the performer’s public/industry profile vs. how much his/her character drove that year’s story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To this day I do not understand how Irene Dailey (Aunt Liz, AW) won Best Actress as a Lead. She was always a Supporting Character! I completely understand how Beverlee McKinsey & Victoria Wyndham canceled each other out & Irene just waltzed right through & I get it that Bev & VW went to the first place that served liquor, called for a table & to be left alone, just bring liquor & they got drunk together & shared their mutual disgust. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Susan Lucci last nomination was 2002 but not sure if she submitted 2003-2012.

Lead was for superstars and long-tenured veterans. Supporting was the holding tank for those who aged out of the younger category but were not quite at superstar level or had enough years to be considered long-tenured veterans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, that’s definitely shifted in the past decade as the soaps have dwindled and the perennials like Slezak, Zimmer, Flannery, Lucci, and Jeanne Cooper either have been largely sidelined or had their shows cancelled, retired, or died. We still have vet/star nominees like Bergman, Stafford, Maura West, and Finola Hughes, but folks like Mishael Morgan, MCE, et al. would have submitted in the Supporting categories back in the day.

Edited by Faulkner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

A year earlier both Beverlee McKinsey and Victoria Wyndham lost Lead Actress to their co-star Laurie Heineman. I think there was some controversy over that win too and I wonder if that was the reason the supporting categories were introduced the following year.

IMO the younger categories were introduced in 1985 in response to the controversy over Judi Evans supporting win in 1984 (she wasn't even 20 years old and had been on GL for only one year at the time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Was that just one year apart?! I don't think I realized that. If I recall correctly people were bothered because the actress had only been in the role a very short period of time. If I'm right, that doesn't seem like a very significant issue to me. She was the first Sharlene. Later, Anna Kathryn Holbrook won an Emmy for Sharlene, too. (She was the #2.)

I have always wished I knew what scenes were on her winning reel. Of course, her story was incredible & she was so good. 

Very early on there was a move to boycott P&G & for one year they received no Emmys, presumably because the boycott was successful. It seems very strange now, the things in the distant past that really got Emmy voters riled up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Same as the Oscars. In what world was Tatum O’Neal “supporting” in Paper Moon? Timothy Hutton in Ordinary People? Viola Davis winning the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for playing the same role she won a Best Lead Actress Tony for? Or even the reverse with Olivia Colman winning Best Actress in a movie where Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone were co-leads (and competing against each other in Supporting Actress). It’s all strategy to have the best chances to win. I wish there was a more objective way for placement but politics and powerful $$$$$ voices always get in the way.

Edited by Faulkner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Don't even put that idea out there!  
    • I liked the food poisoning angle on Thursday because I said beforehand that I would be annoyed if Vanessa was not there at her BFF's party. And I loved they already planned ahead in the dialogue. lol.   But watching the scene (and a bit of a rewind), it hit me. Wait is she...??? Ooo gurrrl. lol. 
    • I'm not at all surprised the 10 lowest-rated episodes are all from Season Seven. Moving The Golden Girls from 9 p.m. to 8 p.m. was foolish.
    • As the folklore goes, Love Boat episodes generally had one "heart" story, one "laughs" story, and one "tears" story. I guess Hotel just stuck with "heart" and "tears."
    • I thought food poisoning was an odd reason for Vanessa to miss the party.  That's why I appreciate reading everyone's comments and theories on this thread.  Oh!!  It hadn't occurred to me to speculate that she might be pregnant. I figured that she and Doug ate different things.  But pregnancy fits better.  I did think Shanice's dialogue delivery was slightly awkward (unusual for her)... but that would make sense if Shanice knew Vanessa had a pregnancy test but Vanessa said don't tell Doug.  I love all this theorizing/speculating, especially since we have no idea what will happen.
    • I want that as well, but given how much I've been playing catch-up during some personal/family drama, it's been background music with very little to hold my interest. Then I saw a spoiler and rolled my eyes.   Very. I guess JG is hitting another of his low points. 
    • Well...unexpected wiggle room is still wiggle room.   I went back and finally rewatched Friday's episode (along with Thursday's). And God, how those episodes flowed. It did help that Zimmerman did the breakdowns for both so the plot threads were cohesive. I do wonder if she did it today as well. Martin and Tate also of course did good scripts. And I might have to take back my earlier comment about the crowd. While it was not like Nicole's Award Event where I felt there were more extras (and was in the minority on that), I felt this one did not have enough (also in the minority). But on a rewatch, I did like that Production actually did a fairly decent job of covering it up so kudos.    I also wanted to take the moment to say the majority of the week before last (and this past week) were full of cliffhangers. Perhaps not what is used to, but they were there. And I loved that since the majority of said cliffhangers were connected to Silk Press Sheila, it gave an intensity and build to the last week leading to this superb episode that gave us not only an old school soap reveal (complete with moments to let the scenes breathe, but annoyed in how other scenes which were also good did not compare...another sign of knowing when a reveal is great) but, THREE cliffhangers!!! Well-done, Cliffhanger Friday!!!   Ms. Mann and Ms. Michelle were clearly the stars. I've said it once someone mentioned it and I'll say it again...Ambyr just gives so much SMG's version of Kendall on AMC in Eva, and I love that. And that reveal on Silk Press Sheila...WOW. Great to have confirmation that BILL was the lawyer. Even better to see Silk Press interacting with all of the Duprees and not being a bit scared. And yes, I caught that she was preggers at the same time as Nicole. I also caught in the Martin vs Ted scene when he was talking about the timeline was another clue...since we discussed the timeline during Kat's birthday party episodes and how odd it was that Silk Press Sheila would celebrate Eva's birthday if the weeks were off. UNLESS...they're not. I just feel they would not be mentioning it unless SilkPress has a 90s DAYS Sami Trump card incoming. And 90s DAYS Sami Brady ALWAYS had a trump card. So...looking forward to today. lol.    I'm also going to be in the minority about the next thought. I thought Maurice did a good job as Ted in the reveal scenes. Though I do agree that compared to everyone else...even his FOINE doctor friend...he was the weak leak. DD was giving and she was in the background reacting. The Avengers...I mean...the Duprees closing ranks...was great and also showed how in sync the actors were. Naomi being sure Chels was not filming THIS time was a hoot. And I lived for Kat's shade among the mess. I'm happy that we are here at this reveal with OriginalTed since the rumor (marking preemptions) we are a little under two weeks to go before he's out.   I liked the layers. One thing that I like about this show. We usually mention something here and then the show writers have it mentioned either in episode or immediately in the next. The SilkPress/Eva picture last week. Where is Naomi/Vanessa this week of episodes. And they got to it. Well-played. I also like the reveal that Martin knew SilkPress as a kid, calling back to that weird scene with the brownie. I mentioned the Bill-as-Lawyer scene, calling back to Bill/Vernon's first alone scene. The reveal of all of SilkPress's many names. The fact that Andre and Dani continue to grow closer and closer and had a near-miss...something this show knows how to do extremely well for me. Their near-misses built up the drama and story, and I see how much I'm invested when we have them. The whole Silk Press Sheila story being the best example.    I see from a few of the comments some of you all are already thinking about those consequences toward Bill that I was thinking about on Friday.

      Please register in order to view this content

           And while I did not like the Vanessa/Doug scenes at first view...though I love they followed up on her food poisoning phone call on Thursday...I liked it on second watch. Partly because it gave another hint that Doug has some idea of what Vanessa is doing...if not who.  Partly because I had assumed that Doug got poisoned, too. Seeing it was just Vanessa confused me since I thought they were out at dinner pre-party. That said...I go back to my original thought in that moment. Has Vanessa being having all this sex without protection and we are going to get a WTD with Doug, Diego, and whoever else she has been with? Uh oh?    And I continue to also love how flashbacks are used. Rare do they show a flashback to a prior episode unless it's important so those are well done. And then you have the flashbacks like the one with Bill/Dani that informs the audience. And I loved that green dress. But tbf, I loved the feistiness of her red dress. Andre was not alone in taking her in.    And someone mentioned it the other day and I wanted to echo it. One thing I like about this show that I don't see much in the other soaps to this degree has been that several of the characters have their own personal style for sure, but the men's style really have stood out for me since its started. Ted being a clear example with his turtlenecks and general...for lack of better word at the moment manly...to him. I like that about the men where other men styles on other soaps just blend together.    Looking forward to Kat v Eva, Anita vs Silk Press Sheila, and Nicole vs Ted today.    Did I mention I was happy Clifton was back?  
    • I’ll take a pass on the lecture, because you've overestimated my concern with your feedback, but thanks for the enthusiasm. Your claims of not wanting to get into an argument over every post are unfortunately voided by your impulsive need to add into discussions that are none of your concern. Finally, you may wish to check the definition of coy, because you've used it incorrectly twice in reference to my writing.  I promise that I do not intend to be coy with you.  Or don't look it up, and just continue to be incorrect, as usual.  
    • I guess it's because the stories on "Hotel" tended to be very...melodramatic, lol?  I mean, it seems like every episode had long-lost lovers reuniting or people finding out someone they knew and/or loved was dying.  And then there was the time Anne Baxter was strung out on dope, lol. Brandon Stoddard must've envied what the other Brandon (Tartikoff) was doing at NBC.
    • Given some of the things that have been said I am going to quote the preface to an analysis I researched & posted about the desired demos when JFP was EP of AW. And, that is more than enough about that, from me.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy