King of Queens, West Wing, Will & Grace. Six Feet Under, Arrested Development, Malcolm in the Middle, Commander in Chief. All those shows are now six feet under or close but all got Emmy nods, sometime to the exclusion of fresher fare.
Since when did the Emmys become posthumous awards. Maybe it should be changed to 'ME,' as in "medical examiner" for all the cold bodies getting the the Academy's attention.
I actually applaud the recognition that something had to be done to keep the awards from becoming like a Friars Club roast, with the same faces showing up year after year, only older. But the new review-board approach didn't appear to cure that problem when the nominations were announced Thursday.
The Academy is in danger of inadvertently spinning the gold of TV's new golden age into a straw man version of its iconic statue (OK, that's a metaphorical stretch, but you get my meaning). Of course, having moved the awards to the ratings doldrums of Aug. 27, maybe nobody will notice.
Yes, there were some new faces, but between those and the ones headed for the undertaker's cosmotologist, there were some glaring omissions. No Shield, no Lost, no Hugh Laurie. No Hugh Laurie? Not even a nod for TV's reining tour de force performance. A part to autopsy a cat in?
House would be called The Hugh Laurie Show if they named shows after stars anyore, and it is one of the best shows on TV, as loyal readers of my ramblings will have heard before.
I was pleased to see that Martin Sheen was nomninated for the drama award he has never won but should have, but without Laurie in the running it would be a hollow victory if he won, which he probably won't.
No actor from Sopranos gets a nod, while 24 gets a dozen. I like 24, but it is salted peanuts to Sopranos Smokehouse brand flavored almonds.
The Academy is right that something needs to be done. But this isn't quite it.
By John Eggerton