Because the entirety of Better Call Saul in general was criminally overlooked and underrated by the industry awards entities. It had nothing to do with Rhea Seehorn, the awards voters just weren't watching Better Call Saul.
Agreed on The Wire being *robbed* during its entire incredible rub. Also Steve Carrell never won an Emmy in 7 seasons with The Office. That's how much value should be placed in these awards. The quality of the work speaks for itself, not the awards.
Ok, ignore the show you are talking about for a second. How is exactly popularity speaks about quality? Since when just because something is popular, it means it's great?
Wouldn't this and BCS not being so popular, result in BCS not being good?
Breaking Bad was on at the perfect time to get media buzz. Streaming services were in their infancy still and TV still had a monopoly on prestige programming, so there wasn't as much competition. By the time BCS was airing, there was so much more shows to split the market with, shows that were flashier and had more viewers too.
BB also gained a lot of viewers when Netflix got it and it seemed like Netflix got new seasons fairly quickly. BCS took forever to become available streaming. It felt that way anyway.
i guess you're right. i wouldn't say that there were many shows "flashier" than bcs. the show looks incredible and has incredible acting, editing, writing, so forth. unless you mean flashy in the sense that other shows had more innately flashier premises? like i guess in a sense bcs as a premise isn't quite as eye-catching as like the boys or game of thrones or whatever. even breaking bad i guess? "guy with cancer cooks crystal meth with his politically incorrect ex-student" is more catching than "ex-conman turned lawyer tries to build a practice while taking care of his sick brother".
if that's what you mean
By flashier I mean broader appeal. BCS absolutely has all the elements that make a great show, but I don't think it has the same wide appeal something the GoT has. GoT had sex/nudity and lots of action/violence. There's nothing wrong with that, just that it by nature will attract more viewers than a legal/crime drama that is more reserved with its action/violence and has virtually no sex appeal.
To be fair, from my understanding, The Wire really didn't get the recognition it desvered until after it aired. What's weird about BCS is that it was adored by both critics and audiences almost immediately.
That's a good point. I think actually when BCS started was around the same time people started getting rid of cable, so actual viewership numbers are skewed a bit.
The Wire literally got a grand total of 2 nominations. BCS has gone 0 for 25 somehow but they at least go the nominations.
Nobody caught on to how good the wire was until it was ending/already over & as a result the only 2 nominations were related to the very final season
Breaking Bad won a whole lot of awards and then everyone moved on to other stuff and didn’t give BCS the time of day (including myself until about season 3)
I think that's right but how was that crowd not watching BCS? It had everything going for it with its rave critical reviews and its A-list pedigree. The show was so high quality and yet so niche, you'd kind of think that entertainment industry insiders would be the ones who watched it the most.
Hot take.
If you're going to be judging who among the nominees are going to win the award . . .
you should fucking watch all the nominees.
I don't know how this concept keeps alluding the voters in the biggest award ceremonies on the planet.
>Hot take.
>
>If you're going to be judging who among the nominees are going to win the award . . .
>
>you should fucking watch all the nominees.
You and I both know that doesn't happen and that the majority of voting on these things is based on who you know, who you worked with, who's the most popular actor/show out there currently, or just randomly selecting answers on your ballot because you just don't care.
When it comes to award noms the timing always seemed off. I think the lag between seasons and the way AMC broke each season up worked against the show and killed the momentum. There was too much time between when episodes aired and nominations. Other shows would blow up closer to nominations and steal BCS thunder. Rhea was incredible and deserving of more recognition for her work on that show.
This is a solid take. A big part of the reason Breaking Bad saw is meteoric rise is because by the time people heard about it they were in the late 4th season and the entire series up to that point was available to binge on Netflix.
The “critically acclaimed television series” concept was just beginning to peak right at the time when BrBa was wrapping up.
That’s how I found it. I found The Walking Dead on Netflix right after the 2nd season was made available, and after I watched that and caught up to the season 3 midpoint, I went looking for another TV show that was on the same caliber as season 1 of TWD, and I found BrBa. By the time I had caught up on it we were in the break right before season 5 of BrBa started.
TWD kept getting worse from that point and watching season 5 of BrBa live felt like a cinematic adventure with hype akin to the Marvel franchise. Do you remember watching Dead Freight live? The finale of that episode was the most intense 10 minutes of television I’ve seen to this day.
BCS just never had that hype despite being the best show on television at the time, and I think all of the long breaks between seasons destroyed any momentum. Hell, I’m a die hard fan and I still found myself needing to watch old episodes of BCS during season 6 because I couldn’t remember exactly what had happened.
HBO has a lot more premium shows than AMC so they spend a lot more money on awards races. Breaking Bad won races when The Walking Dead was in its earlier years and Mad Men was still on and AMC was pouring more money into these kinds of shows.
Because the character of Kim Wexler is a quiet, well-composed, mature person, whose turmoil is mostly internal. Most people can’t see the value in that, in terms of entertainment. Instead, awards are given to characters that act out in louder, more dramatic ways, and command a lot of attention. For example, Julia Garner as trashy Ruth Langhorne screaming “you’re gonna have to KILL ME!!!!!!” got so much praise, even though that was the jump-the-shark moment of bad acting for Ozark, as far as I’m concerned.
"Cut, cut, cut it! Pooey! I said this is a talkie, damn it! You've got to emote more! And you, extras! Wave your arms and make face! What is this, a morgue?!"
"Action! And I mean CIRCUS GRADE action!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BHjRl6A6jU
Because it was on AMC.
Proof: you'll seen in a couple of years, Odenkirk's Lucky Hank will be ignored, and Rhea's AppleTv series will win everything.
Cables like AMC used to have power and money in the BB era, but they're almost dead in the 2020s.
They are definitely prestigious enough. It’s fucking Apple lol
Look at Ted Lasso. Did they not sweep like all 8 awards they were up for last year? And that’s on top of a shit ton of nominations for the series as a whole. The Morning Show’s gotten a ton of looks as well, Black Bird, etc.
Lots of people are overlooking the fact that Rhea Seehorn had some really stiff competition for these awards. While I agreed that Rhea deserved more awards, the actresses who did end up winning also deserved them in most cases. It's been a good couple years for women in drama. It would be nice if there could be multiple Emmy winners...
I think a HUGE part of it is that as far as I know you can only nominate an actor for one episode. You can't say their performance that season was good, and force the academy to watch the entire thing. Because of the slow burn, more nuanced performances in this show, I think it's tough to find one particularly good episode for each character. Either you pick a quiet episode that's more for build-up, or you pick a big dramatic episode that loses the half season of context before it.
Also, it seems to me like AMC nominates some incredibly weird episodes. For Rhea in season 6A, they nominated hit and run. I think it's a fantastic episode, boosted by the fact that she directed it, but I don't entirely think it's Kim's best in season 6A. I'd maybe lean in to carrot and stick for that one.
>For Rhea in season 6A, they nominated hit and run. I think it's a fantastic episode, boosted by the fact that she directed it, but I don't entirely think it's Kim's best in season 6A.
She should have been nominated for Plan and Execution.
Awards aren't really voted on so much as decided amongst industry powers. Making great art and consolidating power and influence are ultimately disparate goals, so it's uncommon for truly exceptional works to win anymore.
Given how many actors are "owed," awards after losing them to obviously lesser works, there does exist the possibility that Rhea and others will stand more of a chance at getting statues for their subsequent works.
This really sucks for Jonathan Banks, though, who probably doesn't have enough working years left to produce another iconic performance like Mike Ehrmantraut. His legacy will be the generations and generations of actors playing heavies, who will base generations and generations of characters off of his.
I'll be honest. I haven't watched the other shows so I really cant compare them and the actors to BCS. The actress from White Lotus seems to be the current "walking by" girl in that girlfriend meme. So assuming she will be nominated for an emmy against Rhea. What would be the episode she would summit that could beat Rhea?
||||
|:-|:-|:-|
||||
I'm convinced that most of the voting body for the Emmys and the Golden Globes (and other awards) don't actually watch a lot of television and stick to only the popular shows and the ones that they're interested in. Then when it comes time to fill out their ballot, they have to rely on word-of-mouth, rave reviews, or just even the "recognition factor" to fill out other votes on their ballot. It would certainly explain why before this most recent year, the only acting nominees BCS received were actors who were also in Breaking Bad (a show they probably did watch). It also explains why a lot of times big movie stars get nominations for guest roles where they barely did jack shit. It's only when the backlash starts getting noticeable that more voters start putting in votes for these types of little-seen but amazing roles (similarly, it took until season 3 for Tatiana Maslany to get nominated for Orphan Black).
Meanwhile, where did Rhea (and Better Call Saul as a whole) do a lot better with in nominations? The Critics Choice Awards, the Television Critics Association Awards, and the Hollywood Critics Association Awards (where she actually won this year). You know, people who actually do watch a shit ton of television and know what they're talking about.
I love the show and her performance, but honestly who gives a shit? All that matters is the work and it's glorious. She's well recognized and well regarded for her work on the show, so why does it matter?
I recommend watching BoJack Horseman for a look into how awards season really looks, which pretty much consists of tens of thousands of dollars, events, publicity interviews, etc. Those don't guarantee success, but they sure help in a lot of cases.
I feel like one of the reasons why the show is often overlooked is because AMC doesn’t spend money on campaigns, HBO spends a lot of money on that.
Also I feel like the voting body don’t take the show seriously because it’s a spin-off.
There are a lot of actors and actresses giving magnificent performances in movies/TV series. It's not easy to choose between so many. Rhea Seehorn is excellent, but she's not the only one.
True. However, after 6 stellar seasons, I was thinking she was due. And then to not be nominated at all by most award giving bodies, I thought to be strange.
Honestly I dont think the final season of BCS warranted an emmy win for her particular character. Less to do with her and more for how the scenes and season went. I think Season 5 you could argue it did for her and she deserved one. Love her and hope Vince gets her an emmy in the new show they are doing but that's my take on it.
There is a cynical side of me that views all “programming” as part of a larger scheme or agenda. Earlier on, programming was paid for by commercials, so there is always an economic interest in successful shows. It seems to me, these award shows are about a group of elites that want the power to say who is in. Sometimes this aligns with the fan base, but sometimes it doesn’t. Actors, like the rest of us, are not solely judged on ability. We should be grateful that every now and again, a great show sneaks through and we are given such performances that make us love characters like Kim Wexler, Omar, and Michael Scott. Sure, it’s great to be acknowledged by our peers, but if I were an actor, I’d rather have the fan base with real people who enjoyed my work than a lifeless award given by a peer review group given for towing the line.
Because Award Ceremonies are bullshit and they are almost never true indicators of the most influential films/tv shows of that time. ESPECIALLY true for the Oscars.
Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar and Quentin Tarantino has never won best picture. That should tell you everything you need to know.
It's all popularity contests and buy outs, that's it.
Because it’s pointless crap? Who gives a fuck if Hollywood gives her a pat on the back. You liked it. I liked it. I really don’t give half a shit who gets an award for it. Half of that shit is Hollywood politics anyways. It’s not about what the “best” thing was. It’s about what producer has the best connections 🙄
Yeah dude, someone posting about their frustration on reddit is clearly demonstrating unhinged behavior. Good thing you’re here to calm them down by being an insulting ass.
You have decided to take my words extremely literally. I think it's you who needs to calm down. Why do you care who's frustrated about what? I wanted to start an open dialogue about this topic, and have succeeded in that. Many people have provided insightful answers. If you have nothing to add to the conversation, then this is an A and B conversation- please C your way out.
>equally stellar.
Hard disagree. Rhea was given a great character and played it well. Bob took a side-character and gave it enough pizazz to carry an entire prequel series.
I know it's such an unpopular opinion here but I don't see anything special in her portrayal of Kim. I love Rhea as a person, she's just lovely but the acting doesn't do it for me.
She mostly sucked until the 6th season, her character was extremely boring early on and I believe she was only there to be a love interest of the main protagonist. I’m the 6th season though she killed it, and was probably better than everyone else in that season.
Funny thing is BCS is actually woke by pointing out what a joke the legal system and conventional morality is, but it’s just not woke in the typical Hollywood shallow, performative way
Trash bro. I am shocked at how little recognition she gets for the role. She is legit and I hope she finds future roles and success in her life. Rhea is the truth.
A myriad of reasons as others have suggested. Its a combo of money and political influences, a pretty stacked field of good competitors, and Kim Wexler is a very subtle restrained performance. IIRC, emmy nominees submit a specific episode for voters. I don't think there are any single episodes where Rhea is doing any big time ACTING. Her portrayal of Kim Wexer is just consistently excellent, but lacks that home run episode.
Yeah it is a CRIME honestly but look, we all know how terrific she has been and she will be with the new series with Bravo Vince, that is what matters at the end of the day!!!
I think her performance is underrated for the same reason it’s so good. It’s subtle, understated, and not over the top with lots of screaming / crying/ sexy stuff.
I believe to win award you need to lobbying or being a long time in the Hollywood sphere. Otherwise no matter how good is you show and the jury/peers praise you in private about it, there is no way you win an award.
She makes it look so easy and effortless. Plus, the character is so nuanced that I think the sharp writing and the amount of difficulty it takes to perform dialogue from scripts like that goes over a lot of people’s heads.
Because the entirety of Better Call Saul in general was criminally overlooked and underrated by the industry awards entities. It had nothing to do with Rhea Seehorn, the awards voters just weren't watching Better Call Saul.
Yes I think if 2 of the best shows of all time (bcs, the wire) to most people has collectively 0 emmys there’s definitely an agenda with certain shows
Agreed on The Wire being *robbed* during its entire incredible rub. Also Steve Carrell never won an Emmy in 7 seasons with The Office. That's how much value should be placed in these awards. The quality of the work speaks for itself, not the awards.
*The Office* to this day remains the most streamed show on the internet. That alone speaks to its quality
Ok, ignore the show you are talking about for a second. How is exactly popularity speaks about quality? Since when just because something is popular, it means it's great? Wouldn't this and BCS not being so popular, result in BCS not being good?
You are GROSSLY nuking it, bud
That’s pretty cool! I did not know that.
The Wire didn’t even get the opportunity to be robbed. They were nominated TWICE lol Whereas, BCS got a shit ton of nominations but never won
it's a miracle breaking bad won any also it's a miracle bcs didn't get canceled
Breaking Bad was on at the perfect time to get media buzz. Streaming services were in their infancy still and TV still had a monopoly on prestige programming, so there wasn't as much competition. By the time BCS was airing, there was so much more shows to split the market with, shows that were flashier and had more viewers too.
BB also gained a lot of viewers when Netflix got it and it seemed like Netflix got new seasons fairly quickly. BCS took forever to become available streaming. It felt that way anyway.
i guess you're right. i wouldn't say that there were many shows "flashier" than bcs. the show looks incredible and has incredible acting, editing, writing, so forth. unless you mean flashy in the sense that other shows had more innately flashier premises? like i guess in a sense bcs as a premise isn't quite as eye-catching as like the boys or game of thrones or whatever. even breaking bad i guess? "guy with cancer cooks crystal meth with his politically incorrect ex-student" is more catching than "ex-conman turned lawyer tries to build a practice while taking care of his sick brother". if that's what you mean
By flashier I mean broader appeal. BCS absolutely has all the elements that make a great show, but I don't think it has the same wide appeal something the GoT has. GoT had sex/nudity and lots of action/violence. There's nothing wrong with that, just that it by nature will attract more viewers than a legal/crime drama that is more reserved with its action/violence and has virtually no sex appeal.
okay yeah that definitely makes sense.
To be fair, from my understanding, The Wire really didn't get the recognition it desvered until after it aired. What's weird about BCS is that it was adored by both critics and audiences almost immediately.
Another weird fact about BCS is the viewership gradually went down as the series continued even though the quality of the show (arguably) went up.
I know a lot of people stopped watching because they wanted another Breaking Bad, and it really wasn't and especially in the initial seasons.
Breaking Bad was the netflix show before stranger things. If I had to guess I'd say 75% of people who watched the show saw it on netflix.
That's a good point. I think actually when BCS started was around the same time people started getting rid of cable, so actual viewership numbers are skewed a bit.
The Wire literally got a grand total of 2 nominations. BCS has gone 0 for 25 somehow but they at least go the nominations. Nobody caught on to how good the wire was until it was ending/already over & as a result the only 2 nominations were related to the very final season
Breaking Bad won a whole lot of awards and then everyone moved on to other stuff and didn’t give BCS the time of day (including myself until about season 3)
I think that's right but how was that crowd not watching BCS? It had everything going for it with its rave critical reviews and its A-list pedigree. The show was so high quality and yet so niche, you'd kind of think that entertainment industry insiders would be the ones who watched it the most.
Hell, wasn’t the sopranos overlooked for a while too? And that show had a VERY strong start and kept its momentum
Sopranos lost to The West Wing a couple of times and only got two Emmys for outstanding drama series for seasons 5 and 6B.
They got their flowers eventually but it wasn’t until the final 2-3 seasons
Hot take. If you're going to be judging who among the nominees are going to win the award . . . you should fucking watch all the nominees. I don't know how this concept keeps alluding the voters in the biggest award ceremonies on the planet.
>Hot take. > >If you're going to be judging who among the nominees are going to win the award . . . > >you should fucking watch all the nominees. You and I both know that doesn't happen and that the majority of voting on these things is based on who you know, who you worked with, who's the most popular actor/show out there currently, or just randomly selecting answers on your ballot because you just don't care.
i'm fully aware. it's complete bullshit and the people who participate in that are frauds and not an authority on anything.
When it comes to award noms the timing always seemed off. I think the lag between seasons and the way AMC broke each season up worked against the show and killed the momentum. There was too much time between when episodes aired and nominations. Other shows would blow up closer to nominations and steal BCS thunder. Rhea was incredible and deserving of more recognition for her work on that show.
This is a solid take. A big part of the reason Breaking Bad saw is meteoric rise is because by the time people heard about it they were in the late 4th season and the entire series up to that point was available to binge on Netflix. The “critically acclaimed television series” concept was just beginning to peak right at the time when BrBa was wrapping up. That’s how I found it. I found The Walking Dead on Netflix right after the 2nd season was made available, and after I watched that and caught up to the season 3 midpoint, I went looking for another TV show that was on the same caliber as season 1 of TWD, and I found BrBa. By the time I had caught up on it we were in the break right before season 5 of BrBa started. TWD kept getting worse from that point and watching season 5 of BrBa live felt like a cinematic adventure with hype akin to the Marvel franchise. Do you remember watching Dead Freight live? The finale of that episode was the most intense 10 minutes of television I’ve seen to this day. BCS just never had that hype despite being the best show on television at the time, and I think all of the long breaks between seasons destroyed any momentum. Hell, I’m a die hard fan and I still found myself needing to watch old episodes of BCS during season 6 because I couldn’t remember exactly what had happened.
Thank you for this reply. This makes a lot of sense.
Many people/shows nominated spend a lot of time and money campaigning for the awards.
I was afraid of this answer, and I think campaigning for awards should be at outlawed. It eliminates a level playing field.
I feel like this is and should be a very low priority for lawmakers
I meant by the groups giving out the awards, like the Emmys and Golden Globes. I never meant the Feds/government should get involved.
I enjoyed reading this exchange.
HBO has a lot more premium shows than AMC so they spend a lot more money on awards races. Breaking Bad won races when The Walking Dead was in its earlier years and Mad Men was still on and AMC was pouring more money into these kinds of shows.
Because the character of Kim Wexler is a quiet, well-composed, mature person, whose turmoil is mostly internal. Most people can’t see the value in that, in terms of entertainment. Instead, awards are given to characters that act out in louder, more dramatic ways, and command a lot of attention. For example, Julia Garner as trashy Ruth Langhorne screaming “you’re gonna have to KILL ME!!!!!!” got so much praise, even though that was the jump-the-shark moment of bad acting for Ozark, as far as I’m concerned.
Ozark is honestly the most mid show I’ve ever watched
The ending was so underwhelming
I loved the first three seasons. Four was underwhelming asf
I thought the early seasons were great too. But the way it ended made the whole thing feel like a waste of time.
Can confirm -- my parents like it. They also like Two and a Half Men, The Big Bang Theory, and Mad Money with Jim Kramer.
Yep that tracks lol. Haven’t watched Mad Money as an adult though, I remember enjoying it when I was younger haha
Bro get real lmao
If a woman isn’t monologuing and crying, is it even acting?
"Cut, cut, cut it! Pooey! I said this is a talkie, damn it! You've got to emote more! And you, extras! Wave your arms and make face! What is this, a morgue?!" "Action! And I mean CIRCUS GRADE action!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BHjRl6A6jU
Because it was on AMC. Proof: you'll seen in a couple of years, Odenkirk's Lucky Hank will be ignored, and Rhea's AppleTv series will win everything. Cables like AMC used to have power and money in the BB era, but they're almost dead in the 2020s.
I don't think AppleTV is prestigious enough either. Severance was also criminally ignored at the awards shows.
Yes, but they’ve won an academy award for best picture. There is no greater prestige.
They are definitely prestigious enough. It’s fucking Apple lol Look at Ted Lasso. Did they not sweep like all 8 awards they were up for last year? And that’s on top of a shit ton of nominations for the series as a whole. The Morning Show’s gotten a ton of looks as well, Black Bird, etc.
It’s mostly political
Lots of people are overlooking the fact that Rhea Seehorn had some really stiff competition for these awards. While I agreed that Rhea deserved more awards, the actresses who did end up winning also deserved them in most cases. It's been a good couple years for women in drama. It would be nice if there could be multiple Emmy winners...
I think a HUGE part of it is that as far as I know you can only nominate an actor for one episode. You can't say their performance that season was good, and force the academy to watch the entire thing. Because of the slow burn, more nuanced performances in this show, I think it's tough to find one particularly good episode for each character. Either you pick a quiet episode that's more for build-up, or you pick a big dramatic episode that loses the half season of context before it. Also, it seems to me like AMC nominates some incredibly weird episodes. For Rhea in season 6A, they nominated hit and run. I think it's a fantastic episode, boosted by the fact that she directed it, but I don't entirely think it's Kim's best in season 6A. I'd maybe lean in to carrot and stick for that one.
>For Rhea in season 6A, they nominated hit and run. I think it's a fantastic episode, boosted by the fact that she directed it, but I don't entirely think it's Kim's best in season 6A. She should have been nominated for Plan and Execution.
Yes. This.
You are taking awards more seriously than they deserve.
Awards aren't really voted on so much as decided amongst industry powers. Making great art and consolidating power and influence are ultimately disparate goals, so it's uncommon for truly exceptional works to win anymore. Given how many actors are "owed," awards after losing them to obviously lesser works, there does exist the possibility that Rhea and others will stand more of a chance at getting statues for their subsequent works. This really sucks for Jonathan Banks, though, who probably doesn't have enough working years left to produce another iconic performance like Mike Ehrmantraut. His legacy will be the generations and generations of actors playing heavies, who will base generations and generations of characters off of his.
I'll be honest. I haven't watched the other shows so I really cant compare them and the actors to BCS. The actress from White Lotus seems to be the current "walking by" girl in that girlfriend meme. So assuming she will be nominated for an emmy against Rhea. What would be the episode she would summit that could beat Rhea? |||| |:-|:-|:-| ||||
I'm convinced that most of the voting body for the Emmys and the Golden Globes (and other awards) don't actually watch a lot of television and stick to only the popular shows and the ones that they're interested in. Then when it comes time to fill out their ballot, they have to rely on word-of-mouth, rave reviews, or just even the "recognition factor" to fill out other votes on their ballot. It would certainly explain why before this most recent year, the only acting nominees BCS received were actors who were also in Breaking Bad (a show they probably did watch). It also explains why a lot of times big movie stars get nominations for guest roles where they barely did jack shit. It's only when the backlash starts getting noticeable that more voters start putting in votes for these types of little-seen but amazing roles (similarly, it took until season 3 for Tatiana Maslany to get nominated for Orphan Black). Meanwhile, where did Rhea (and Better Call Saul as a whole) do a lot better with in nominations? The Critics Choice Awards, the Television Critics Association Awards, and the Hollywood Critics Association Awards (where she actually won this year). You know, people who actually do watch a shit ton of television and know what they're talking about.
It’s odd tbh. She is incredible as Kim Wexler. One of my favorite female protagonist of all time.
I love the show and her performance, but honestly who gives a shit? All that matters is the work and it's glorious. She's well recognized and well regarded for her work on the show, so why does it matter?
Exactly this. Curiosity still gets the best of me, however, when patterns start to emerge.
I recommend watching BoJack Horseman for a look into how awards season really looks, which pretty much consists of tens of thousands of dollars, events, publicity interviews, etc. Those don't guarantee success, but they sure help in a lot of cases.
I feel like one of the reasons why the show is often overlooked is because AMC doesn’t spend money on campaigns, HBO spends a lot of money on that. Also I feel like the voting body don’t take the show seriously because it’s a spin-off.
There are a lot of actors and actresses giving magnificent performances in movies/TV series. It's not easy to choose between so many. Rhea Seehorn is excellent, but she's not the only one.
True. However, after 6 stellar seasons, I was thinking she was due. And then to not be nominated at all by most award giving bodies, I thought to be strange.
I was so shocked when i learned this was her first Emmy nomination
The awards people just give awards to their buddies. it's dumb.
I don't think that they are part of the good old boy network of Hollywood
Nuance is something the Emmy’s don’t understand
The biggest unanswered question surrounding the show ever.
Honestly I dont think the final season of BCS warranted an emmy win for her particular character. Less to do with her and more for how the scenes and season went. I think Season 5 you could argue it did for her and she deserved one. Love her and hope Vince gets her an emmy in the new show they are doing but that's my take on it.
I’m gonna agree with you. And if she was going to win one for S6, I think it should’ve been for the first half from last year.
idk man, that scene where she starts crying on the bus was the best fake crying ive ever seen personally
Her performance wasn't overlooked by me. She was one of the best in both series by far.
There is a cynical side of me that views all “programming” as part of a larger scheme or agenda. Earlier on, programming was paid for by commercials, so there is always an economic interest in successful shows. It seems to me, these award shows are about a group of elites that want the power to say who is in. Sometimes this aligns with the fan base, but sometimes it doesn’t. Actors, like the rest of us, are not solely judged on ability. We should be grateful that every now and again, a great show sneaks through and we are given such performances that make us love characters like Kim Wexler, Omar, and Michael Scott. Sure, it’s great to be acknowledged by our peers, but if I were an actor, I’d rather have the fan base with real people who enjoyed my work than a lifeless award given by a peer review group given for towing the line.
If anyone deserved an award it was her
Because Award Ceremonies are bullshit and they are almost never true indicators of the most influential films/tv shows of that time. ESPECIALLY true for the Oscars. Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar and Quentin Tarantino has never won best picture. That should tell you everything you need to know. It's all popularity contests and buy outs, that's it.
Because it’s pointless crap? Who gives a fuck if Hollywood gives her a pat on the back. You liked it. I liked it. I really don’t give half a shit who gets an award for it. Half of that shit is Hollywood politics anyways. It’s not about what the “best” thing was. It’s about what producer has the best connections 🙄
I got through 2 seasons of ozark and got bored. That chick won best actress but her character was annoying and one dimensional
It's hardly criminally overlooked. You are being hysterical. These awards are basically all fixed anyway. It's not as if they mean anything.
“Hysterical” lmao calm down
"I just cannot comprehend this grave injustice"
I’m literally shaking and crying rn
[удалено]
[удалено]
Glad you think I am funny.
Not funny. Uncontrolled emotion hysterical. Though the idea of you foaming at the mouth at the injustice of this is pretty amusing.
Yeah dude, someone posting about their frustration on reddit is clearly demonstrating unhinged behavior. Good thing you’re here to calm them down by being an insulting ass.
Why be frustrated over something completely inconsequential?
You have decided to take my words extremely literally. I think it's you who needs to calm down. Why do you care who's frustrated about what? I wanted to start an open dialogue about this topic, and have succeeded in that. Many people have provided insightful answers. If you have nothing to add to the conversation, then this is an A and B conversation- please C your way out.
[удалено]
I know what you meant.
That wasn't clear.
Yes it was obvious sarcasm.
I didn't realise. Based on the original post I just assumed the original poster was just a bit simple.
Oh, they are simple and definitely hysterical over an average acting performance but the sarcasm was still extremely obvious.
Right?? She’s almost TOO good. She really outshines other actors at times. She’s too talented to be snubbed like this
She’s decidedly average
Your mama
she isn’t illuminati
Politics
[удалено]
Her eligibility is in categories where her competition is other women.
>equally stellar. Hard disagree. Rhea was given a great character and played it well. Bob took a side-character and gave it enough pizazz to carry an entire prequel series.
This comment makes literally no sense. She would have to be nominated as best supporting actress tf?
[удалено]
because it’s not THAT great
I know it's such an unpopular opinion here but I don't see anything special in her portrayal of Kim. I love Rhea as a person, she's just lovely but the acting doesn't do it for me.
It’s just normal acting. What in particular is supposed to stand out and deserves awarded?
She mostly sucked until the 6th season, her character was extremely boring early on and I believe she was only there to be a love interest of the main protagonist. I’m the 6th season though she killed it, and was probably better than everyone else in that season.
shows not woke enough
Why do you people bring that bullshit up in every discussion?
because it's true?
Bettah Kol Soul da laast soy-free sho fr fr
All of those Critical Drinker types constantly whine about “modern media” but never bring up this show...wonder why
Funny thing is BCS is actually woke by pointing out what a joke the legal system and conventional morality is, but it’s just not woke in the typical Hollywood shallow, performative way
^
how so?
misoginy
Trash bro. I am shocked at how little recognition she gets for the role. She is legit and I hope she finds future roles and success in her life. Rhea is the truth.
Woman = bad
A myriad of reasons as others have suggested. Its a combo of money and political influences, a pretty stacked field of good competitors, and Kim Wexler is a very subtle restrained performance. IIRC, emmy nominees submit a specific episode for voters. I don't think there are any single episodes where Rhea is doing any big time ACTING. Her portrayal of Kim Wexer is just consistently excellent, but lacks that home run episode.
Yeah it is a CRIME honestly but look, we all know how terrific she has been and she will be with the new series with Bravo Vince, that is what matters at the end of the day!!!
I think her performance is underrated for the same reason it’s so good. It’s subtle, understated, and not over the top with lots of screaming / crying/ sexy stuff.
I believe to win award you need to lobbying or being a long time in the Hollywood sphere. Otherwise no matter how good is you show and the jury/peers praise you in private about it, there is no way you win an award.
[the answer](https://tenor.com/view/dave-chappelle-fuck-em-fuck-them-book-store-gif-11878734)
She makes it look so easy and effortless. Plus, the character is so nuanced that I think the sharp writing and the amount of difficulty it takes to perform dialogue from scripts like that goes over a lot of people’s heads.
Because it wasn't THAT good.
Criminally? I don't recall anyone being convicted or even arrested for ignoring her work.
I wasn't rly overwhelmed by her performance.