Volume 94, Issue 8
|ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT
Pretension abounds at the Emmys
The 52nd Annual Prime Time Emmy awards were handed out this past Sunday in Los Angeles. As usual, it was a star-studded affair, with the best and brightest of television's stars coming out to honour each other, as well as excellence in television programming.
Here's my question: If the whole point of the show is to recognize those series and specials that meet a particular standard of quality and entertainment value, then why are the Emmys themselves so tedious? Although host Garry Shandling did his thing and there were some notable entertaining moments, overall it was just plain bad television. It seems the Emmys are an entertainment exercise in irony.
One particularly nauseating section was a montage of clips from the past season aimed to acknowledge the "courage" and the "risk-taking" that Hollywood's television industry displayed last year. Maybe the wrong reel was shown, but for the most part, all I saw was a bunch of cloying, sugary melodrama. Although Shandling presented his own montage that parodied the proceeding reel the damage was already done.
Perhaps that is the problem with award shows. The whole point of these kinds of productions is to give the industry a collective pat on the back. These shows are generally bad because they offer nothing more than an excuse to trumpet all of the wonderful pieces of art produced over the previous year (that's sarcasm folks).
It's not that I don't think there are some great things coming from the world of entertainment. I'm a pop culture junkie and I love much of what is produced year after year, but the whole concept of award shows is just so self-aggrandizing that it turns my stomach. It wouldn't be so bad if the awards weren't presented as being in recognition of earth-shatteringly important work. Entertainment is nice and helps make life a little more bearable, but come on, aren't there more important people that could be given our applause too?
To talk about the actual awards for a minute, do you get the sense that maybe David Letterman and Michael J. Fox won not because they deserved to but because of the personal and physical hardships they've had to deal with recently? I'm a big fan of both, but in all honestly, their performances this past season were hardly the best of their respective careers.
And finally, why the hell was Rob Lowe's tuxedo so shiny?
Copyright © The Gazette 2000