This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"I'm an unemployed librarian with a tendency to get knocked on the head."
11944 members | you are not logged in | 28 August 2014




Tweet







July 16 2004

Amy Acker should have got an Emmy nomination. A MSNBC article which bemoans the same old faces getting nominated, praises Amy for her performance in Angel (vote for her in the poll).

Yep. I completely agree. I loved Fred ever since the gang met her in Pylea and I especially loved her in "Fredless" and wanted her to be with Wesley since he started making googly eyes at her in season 3, and I loved them finally getting together, but I was stunned by the majesty of Illyria. I applaud Amy's portrayal of Illyria and Fred/Illyria, which showed her range as an actress. Illyria was fascinating where Fred was cute and lovable. Illyria was an enigma and I've been truly inspired by Amy Acker's performance as "Little Shiva", the walking obituary. It's something I'll never forget. I don't know if I've been this fascinated by a single Buffy character, and we had such a short time to get to know her.

Ok, I'll stop my gushing now, but Amy Acker honestly deserves an Emmy. I hope the genre awards shows shower her with trophies, it's what she deserves.
My question is where was FOX, ME, and her management all of which could have tossed Amy's hat in the ring for a shot at an Emmy outside of the typical network hoppla even though in a strange way it may have made the WB look good had any of the cast got the nominations they should have deserved. Guess no one wanted to kick in the cash for the deserving so instead we are stuck with the mediocore greedy.
Yeah, the nominations were pretty predictable, and I agree Amy should have been nominated. I must confess that I was not a huge fan of Fred. But AA's transformation into Illyria totally blew me away. And then the subtle differences in "Fred" when Illyria played her, such that AA had effectively created three distinct characters. Wow.
Well nice to see an article saying what we're all thinking. So, what, by now if your show is on HBO you get an automatically included Emmy nomination? Sorry but most of those huge famous shows are a tad overrated I think.

Really, Sex & the City? How 'great' would everyone think it was if they'd made it about 4 guys in NY? Whose 'normal' lives consisted of seeing their faces on billboards, buying expensive clothes and attending jet-set art gallery parties all the time? And who were screwing new girls literally every week and spent their lunches bragging about it and complaining about their conquests' physical/mental/emotional shortcomings? Oh and one recurring 'flame' would be this hot girl whose name we don't need to know. Just her nickname; Miss Bigjugs. Really, how many people would think it was 'innovative'? And why should I think it's great just because in the show it's girls instead of guys?? And why did they have to have the words "At that moment, she realized that..." appear 9 times per ep?? ARGH! Sorry had to get that off my chest. I'll shut up about it...

Westwings, Sopranos, Frasier....none of them 'bad' but not this good. Not this much better than other shows. Gawd, do these shindigs really have to be about absolutely nothing but the most obvious and safe backslapping? Blagh! Ok it's late and I know when I'm ranting. Going to bed now......
But its a good rant EdDantes. I agree whole heartedly. Thats the best review of Sex & the City ever...
Amy deserved a nomination for her performance as Fred-Illyria. To be able to convincingly portray two personas, and then switch back and forth between them, is no easy task for a thespian. And it takes an actor of considerable talent to successfully deploy this technique.
It is unfortunate that many talented individuals get overlooked for awards simply because of the genre of their work. And though BtVS and AtS blend genres and categories, the industry lumps them (directly and indirectly) into the Sci-Fi/Horror genre, which gets little respect or consideration, especially with regard to Emmys, Oscars, and the like.
Illyria drew my critical attention right from the moment of her (re-)birth. Never before have I been so fascinated or intrigued by a single Buffy or Angel character. As an academic, I have been composing an essay that examines this rich and complex character using the schools of thought within which I have been trained. I am looking forward to understanding Illyria better though this study. (Thank you, Amy, for providing such a nuanced performance!)
I agree that Amy should have been nominated. I wasn't impressed when I first saw Fred she was a good character and seemed to be acted adequately. But when I saw Amy in an interview and I noticed she was nothing like Fred I was totally blown away. In that regard alone she deserved recognition. For her to act Fred in a way that no one can tell she's acting as much as she is, that's talent. Then when Illyria happened... well we all know how great she was at that. Here's to you Amy. The Emmy nominee (and winner) in our hearts
Know what, maybe we should all send her a postcard or letter telling her that to us, she is the winner.
Anyone have a mailing address?
I think she'd like that, knowing that even though the Academy passed her over, the fans know just how talented she really is!!
"But its a good rant EdDantes. I agree whole heartedly. Thats the best review of Sex & the City ever..."

Thanks. I needed to hear that, heh.

"Amy deserved a nomination for her performance as Fred-Illyria. To be able to convincingly portray two personas, and then switch back and forth between them, is no easy task for a thespian. And it takes an actor of considerable talent to successfully deploy this technique."

Yeah she surprised a lot of people when she had to do those scenes. I too thought she was cute and a good Fred, and had the stuff to deliver the dry-witted lines on the ME shows. (When Angel tells her in Pylea they made Cordy Queen her response was brilliant: "Oh...! They.....they didn't do that...with me. But, but good for her!") But maybe not the greatest actress in the world or the most difficult role. But this season she really got to show her chops.

I remember James Marsters saying at Sharon Osbourne something along the same lines. How he sort of thought Fred was Amy in a lot of ways and how impressed he was with her when she had to be Illyria and switch back and forth, that she was just the best (And of course, how much she 'rocked!' hehe)

"Know what, maybe we should all send her a postcard or letter telling her that to us, she is the winner."

That's a really nice idea. Must be some place that can be send. Her management perhaps? Can that be found online?
I agree 100%. I thought Amy was fine and liked Fred well enough. What I didn't realize until the Illyria stuff was what a truly amazing talent Amy is. As someone else stated in this thread, there were realy three distinct characters: Fred, Illyria, and Illyria playing at being Fred. I was absolutely floored and I think that for the Emmys to pass without recognizing her amazing work is flat out unacceptable. Anyone have the address to send postcards/letters yet?
That's what has been cool about the Buffyverse, the chances it's given the different actors to actually play multiple roles and play them so well. Whether it's Fred/Illyria, Angel/Angelus, Spike/William, Buffy/Faith or Willow/Vamp Willow (liked Vamp Willow as a better opposite than dark Willow) we've gotten to see some really fine extremes from so many people over the years...

What's not so cool is the NO Emmy situation...I agree, sending Amy a virtual Emmy would be a nice thing to do.
I would sell major body parts to be able to see Angel S6 and what would have happened with Ilyria and Wesley. Not knocking her but if Marisa Tomei can win an Oscar for My Cousin Vinny then AA deserves an Emmy at the very least! What does it take to get a Buffyverse actor some recognition? A signed testomonial from two living Popes?!
Great summation, T, of one of the shows' great achievements, which is to demonstrate that no-one is monochromatic, but rather that we are all made up of different, sometimes conflicting, people, and that we all have the potential to change.

To your brief list I'd add: Xander/hyena Xander, Xander's split in "The Replacement", Xander and Buffy's Halloween transformations, Amy/Amy's mom, Band Candy Giles and Joyce/regular Giles and Joyce, those under spells in "Bewitched, Bothered" and "Something Blue", the alternate verse characters in "The Wish" and "Superstar", Buffy/beer-bad Buffy, Buffy/Buffybot, and Anya/Aud. (I'm sure I missed some . . . )

And then more in the line of evolving characters, but affording actors a chance to play different aspects of a part: Ripper/Giles, Buffy/resurrected listless Buffy, evil Darla/conflicted Darla/pre-vamp Darla, and, especially, Wesley in Buffy/Wesley pre-throat slash/"Dark Wesley". I love that fantasy allows the metaphor of identity and transformation to be made "real", as it were.

BTW Ed: I've rather enjoyed the 2 or 3 eps of "Sex & the City" that I've caught. It would never be a must-see, but I found it witty and quite charming, in a sort of throaway style.
Well, I just had to pipe up to defend Sex & The City. It's a hilarious show with a lot of heart, and one of maybe two live-action "sitcoms" I can think of that consistently makes me laugh out loud. The other is Arrested Development. It deserves the praise that it gets.

As for Amy Acker, I'm offended but not at all shocked by her non-nomination. But we're talking about the Emmys here. The people who didn't even bother nominating The Body or OMWF for any awards. They're ridiculously out of touch. I can't wait for the day when The West Wing and The Sopranos are gone so they'll be forced to nominate something else.
The poll's not working for me. Sigh.

I actually let myself hope that Amy Acker might be nominated this year. I actually let myself harbor those hopes. I thought that since the show is actually kind of critically acclaimed, and that thanks to all the fandom and media attention concerning the show's cancellation, and also due to the killer Fred/Illyria storyline, there was a reason for me to actually think that AA could have been nominated...and because I hoped, I'm now disappointed. I won't lie; I don't care about the Emmys, but jeez. This show gets no breaks.

And I'm another one who thought AA as Fred was adequate but not mind-blowing, and then AA did blow my mind every episode since AHITW on.
I agree about Sex & the City SoddingNancyTribe. The reality is nothing ranks up there w/ Buffy/Angel, but HBO really delivers an entertaining, well-written product with Sex, Sopranos, and Six Feet Under. Sex & the City has some degree of originality in it, in that it focuses on single, successful women, in an unapologetic light. It wouldn't be original at all if it were 4 guys, btw Ed. That would be a done-to-death concept. S&theC does make me laugh, and I can relate to situations throughout the series. But, I own every Buffy/Angel DVD available....and I keep meaning to get around to picking up S&theC on DVD...but haven't.

I confess to being a Law&Order addict too. Only the original and SVU though. That show is another that really is a genre to itself....it's not about plot twists, or character development. It's not even really about whodunit. (If whodunit was there goal, I would not be supportive of it.) It is a look at the process of criminal investigation/prosecution. That's what gets me stuck in front of every damn Law&Order marathon that's on TV. I love the process, I love the debating of the issues. I'm the dork who's crowning High School achievement was my involvement in Mock Trial as a Pre-Trial proecution attorney arguing constitutionality of a particular topic. It's why I liked West Wing, when Sorkin was involved. A fascination, and yes sometimes, disgust, with the political process. But then...they put Angel up against West Wing...bye bye West Wing.

(Returning from my tangent)...I hope AA revels in the critic and fan response to her not being nominated, whatever the reason. Her work this last year in Angel was impeccable and a joy to watch.
The Sopranos deserves every award it gets (except for Steve Buscemi's Best Supporting nomination this year. I like most of his work, but he didn't really do anything significant as Tony B). I thought it was hugely overrated when I watched its first season and a half, but by Season 3 and 4, I thought it was easily one of the best dramas I'd ever seen. It's a slow-build thing, you're rewarded for watching it all the way through. Most of the performances are incredible, especially Edie Falco's.

Sex & The City done with guys instead? That'd be the recent 2-season British series Manchild, about four men in their forties, each going through their own mid-life crisis, lusting after younger women and such...Tony Head starred as one of the four guys. The series was pretty funny, a lot of critics even liked it more than S&tC. I'm a diehard S&tC fan though, so I wouldn't quite rate it that high despite the great dry Brit humor and the actors' performances. Anyone who only saw "buying expensive clothes and attending jet-set art gallery parties" and "screwing new [guys] literally every week" in S&tC didn't give it enough of a chance (and anyway, a lot of that was pretty entertaining. That's where a lot of the show's humor came from--the situations they'd get themselves tangled up in, the sometimes bizarre guys they'd meet, all their relationship hang-ups. This is stuff that many people actually go through in real life while searching for that someone--or just looking for a decent one-nighter--albeit amped up to an extreme for TV entertainment's sake). The show featured four fully realized female characters, each differing in a lot of their values and goals, and many fleshed out boyfriends/husbands and family members. There were story arcs, there was good dialgoue, there were many emotional highs and lows. And it was one of the few half-hour comedy/sitcom-type shows that I could stomach (the others would be Scrubs, Undeclared, Andy Richter, and as it's being re-aired in Canada and I'm catching what I missed, Arrested Development is growing on me).

I haven't seen The Wire and I'm just getting into Oz's second season at the moment, but with Carnivale, Deadwood, Sex & The City, the incredible Six Feet Under, and The Sopranos, HBO is doing all right by me so far.

My Emmy disappointments (all in good fun since these awards don't really mean crap anyway)...

-Why is CSI nominated for best drama? Carnivale, Angel, The Shield--all more deserving.
-Will & Grace is pretty much habit-TV for me, and I still occasionally like it, but if an NBC sitcom from this past season has to be nominated, Friends deserved that spot (I also don't get the Everybody Loves Raymond appeal, despite watching about a dozen eps. I like some of the cast of that series, but overall it's not that great a package). A end-of-series pity vote at least, I mean Seinfeld received the same despite its last season not being regarded as its best. More than that though--still no Scrubs?!
-Amy Acker outdid Jennifer Garner easily this year, can't weigh in on any of the others since I don't watch The West Wing, L&O:SVU, or Joan of Arcadia...but Edie Falco definitely deserves to be there again for The Sopranos.
-Yeah, um...Matt LeBlanc had his bit Joey spotlight story in the previous season of Friends, so I dunno what he's doing in the nominations this year. Should've gone to someone from Scrubs
-more genre-TV representation needed. Unfortunately there weren't a whole lotta genre series that deserved to be nominated this year since 'cause there either aren't many being made anymore or the networks have canceled most of 'em, but Carnivale should've gotten a Best Series nom and received some Best Actor/Actress and Supporting Actor/Actress noms and Angel should've been represented heavily in the Best Supporting categories. Amy Acker and Alexis Denisof were shoe-ins. I'd even go so far as to say that one or two of the Enterprise actors may've deserved a look this year. That series finally approached what I'd consider a "quality series" this year and a few of the actors really settled into their characters and arcs this year (Connor Trinneer as Trip, Jolene Blalock as the T&A of the series, Vulcan T'Pol, and the one actor who's been perfect since the beginning, John Billingsley as Dr. Phlox). But yeah, what other major contenders in the genre TV area were there besides Angel, Carnivale, and Enterprise? I've got a lot of fondness for poor Jake 2.0, which only got better with age and featured a great, small, close-knit ensemble cast, but I'm not sure it deserves any nominations except for maybe series lead Christopher Gorrham (who Buffy viewers will remember as the dead Sunnydale High kid in love with his teacher in "I Only Have Eyes For You", as well as a bunch of other WB roles). This is why all those sci-fi and fantasy-focused creators need to pitch their ideas exclusively to safer environments like HBO, FX (where we've got The Shield and Nip/Tuck so far, and I'm sure genre TV could thrive), and maybe even Showtime.
I've held off for a day because I was so damn furious when I read that there was fucking NOTHING for Angel.

I just can't hold back any more. I apologize for being more profane than usual, but a good cuss word sometimes says it better than anything.

WHEN are the stodgey old Methuselahs on the Emmy committee going to start dying off so we can actually get some new blood recognized?? I can't (insert creative expletive here) believe they overlooked Joss and his work, and Amy, and Alexis, and all the effects guys. AGAIN.

You know what I think? I think Joss takes a very hard line on his creative vision. I think he sticks to his guns with regard to his shows, and even though he soaks up input from his people, I think he pretty much just nods and smiles at the suits. So he gets a name, a label, a "difficult" attached to him, and the egomaniacs that are supposed to honor good shit get their necks bowed and won't even glance in his direction when the honor roll comes through.

How I HATE them. *seethe*

At first I thought that I just wanted some personal validation for loving the 'verse as I do. But then I realized that it was like watching the smart kid get pushed down on the playground. The injustice! The unfairness. The complete invalidation of a person. I know Joss would be THRILLED to get even a nomination. Even though he pretends like he doesn't care, he's said in interviews that, well, yeah, it would be nice. If one of his actors got nominated, he'd be over the moon for them.

Why can't they give him/ME this? They SO deserve it. Gawd it's been a day and I still am soooo angry!
Willowy, I couldn't agree with you more. The Emmy's are overlooking true artistic talent, some of the best in the biz, when they overlook Joss Whedon's TV shows. It's a crying, crying, shame.
Wow! Some of you guys manage to watch a lot of television!!! :)

If i'm honest i can't comment on half of the shows that have been mentioned simply because i have never seen any of them due to extreme lack of time to sit in front of the box.

Sex and the City, The West Wing, Sopranos, Six Feet Under? Apart from the knowledge they exist i couldn't give you an opinion on any of them.

My television time has always been at a premium (damn social life! lol) so i stick to just a few shows that i know will hit the spot. Buffy, Angel, Stargate, Alias, Family Guy, Friends and Firefly (if you can count a show i've only ever watched on DVD) are pretty much the only reasons i put the telly on other than for the news and rock music channels (one of the benefits of working from home, having Kerrang available 24 hours a day!).

All that having been said i have to agree that Amy deserves some sort or recognition for the amazing job she did this last season. A pity that these award people have a habit of snubbing anything remotely Joss related!
TDS, I don't watch a lot of TV, but I used to pre-Buffy. I was a TV kid, was raised on it. I was a total junkie. Now I just watch intellectual TV shows, and most of them I only see via DVDs.

I never watched The West Wing or The Sopranos or Sex and The City. I have those on my list of DVDs to rent or borrow from the library.

Getting DVDs from the library was how I got hooked on Buffy. within 3 months of watching seasons 1-3, I was already buying them for myself.

It sparked my obsession with genre TV, shows like Babylon 5 and Alias and 24 (although I don't know that Alias and 24 are actually genre shows).

I don't pay attention to awards shows like The Oscars or The Emmys because I'm not really a fan of mainstream entertainment. It's only post-Buffy that I've been interested in the Emmy's just for the fact that I feel the Whedon-verse deserves much more acclaim than it gets, which is quite an understatement about what I regard to be the best shows to ever grace our television screens.
Thanks for your accord, electricspacegirl. :)

I have watched a lot of tv. All my life. I find it funny that there are so many choices out there, and more often than not, I flip through once or twice, say meh, and turn it off.

I've seen all the shows mentioned, and watched S&TC a lot when I was laid up. Liked it, but it always felt like I was watching a play. Never felt "real" to me like Joss's shows. I was never invested in those women. I don't know, I've told you guys before that Joss changed tv for me. Can't really explain it any other way.
Definitely Amy Acker deserves some recognition for her work this seson, but I don't think we should forget about Alexis Denisof who's character Wesley changed so much over the 6 years that he played him. He also deserves some recognition for his great acting.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home