It’s going to be a weird Emmys year. It just is.
This year’s awards ceremonies come in an atmosphere of deep labor unrest, most evident in the form of the writers’ strike that has been ongoing since May and the threat of a strike at the Screen Actors Guild as early as this week. (In fact, the SAG contract now expires on July 12, the day the nominations are announced.) The Emmy campaign has already been affected by the WGA strike, and if any of the strikes are still ongoing, it will be in mid-September, when the broadcast is scheduled, these terms will mess things up. And at a deeper level, these riots — coupled with developments like the release of Maureen Ryan’s groundbreaking industry exposé Burn It Down — have complicated the craze for good TV, as well as the ambivalence about how streaming TV is done and the toll the business takes on well-known and little-known people alike.
Even in a less stormy year, there may be times when an Emmy story older than five years is irrelevant. How do you compare the Emmys of the 1980s, when there were essentially three commercial stations plus PBS to choose from, to 2023? How do you compare a time when mainstream success often meant running 10 or 11 seasons to the situation we’re in now where four or five is really good runs? Or analyze seasons with 22 or 23 episodes alongside seasons with only 8 or 10 episodes? Or compare when there were five nominees in a category to now when there are eight?
One answer, of course, is that the Emmys (and awards in general) don’t matter, but what matters is a tricky calculation. The Emmys remain television’s highest-profile form of recognition, and something like Abbott Elementary’s strong performance last year can help with the crucial task of spreading what the industry sees as its best work. It’s easy to say that Emmys don’t matter when you’re swimming in the money and already mighty in your field. The more I watched the awards seasons, the more strategic I saw them as things that could help strengthen the hands of writers and creators (like Abbott’s Quinta Brunson) at a time when their work is expanding feels particularly valuable.
Big Debuts
A big role the Emmy can play is to welcome and encourage new shows — and they still do, even in the crowded landscape we have now. Major awards from the start helped raise the profile of shows like Squid Game, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Ted Lasso, and The Handmaid’s Tale. Where could new shows cause a big stir?
Of the eight comedy series nominated last year, two are ineligible this year (Hacks and Curb Your Enthusiasm), so there are at least two spots that could well go to new series. The main contender is probably FX/Hulus’ “The Bear,” which might be said to be out of place in the comedy category, but likely deserves a comedy series nomination, as well as credits for writing, directing, and… acting is preserved.
Slightly longer shots that would still be well deserved could be Peacock’s Poker Face, the week’s retro crime series starring Natasha Lyonne, or Shrinking, the Apple comedy series that seems like a good choice to feature Harrison Ford first Emmy nomination include . Poker Face received many nominations, in part because of the stellar cast of guest stars, 21 of which (including the likes of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Lil Rel Howery, Adrien Brody, Stephanie Hsu and Hong Chau) submitted their names as potential nominees.
It’s interesting that Hollywood is conflicted in part because of the lesson The Bear keeps teaching: Greatness undoubtedly comes from talent — but also from nurturing, learning, practice, and the time that talent becomes functional, albeit at times chaotic way to shape. Workplace. Perhaps the Emmys most poignant this year are the ones that serve as a reminder that nurturing your creative community is the best way to nurture your industry.
Copyright 2023 NPR. For more information, see https://www.npr.org.