Press "Enter" to skip to content

Emmy Awards weren’t up to par

So did anyone actually watch the Emmys?  Pardon me, the “Primetime” Emmys.
With all TV has to offer these days, how could such an awards show be such a flop?  We recently ran an article on the MTV Video Music awards and, simply put, I thought it was unentertaining.
So I ask myself what the problem is. Why do we no longer find ourselves drawn to seeing a nominee in tears over winning such a monumental award?
Perhaps we have been so desensitized by “shock value” that we can’t find our attentions aroused over a simple acceptance speech by an actor (or writer) who has worked his or her entire life for such an award.
Who am I kidding? The show was just boring and there was better stuff on TV.
I think maybe the Emmys are getting the hint that we are no longer interested.
The Emmys seemed to have worked extremely hard on revitalizing the program by giving us not just one great host, but instead five quite mediocre “hosts.”
Did anyone else notice how pissed off Tom Begeron was in the opening “filling 12 minutes of dialogue” segment. I actually found that to be my favorite part of the show.
Howie Mandel would not shut the hell up. For a guy that is afraid of everything, he sure didn’t mind camera time.
However, I did manage to find some more pleasant highlights. You have to give a hand to Don Rickles for pulling through and winning Outstanding Individual Performance in a Variety or Music Special.  Whoever thought a guy could make a career off being a jerk?
I also applaud “Mad Men” for winning Outstanding Drama Series. The show only has one million viewers (in comparison to American Idol’s 30 million), yet still managed to pull in the awards.
It was a nice victory for shows that just don’t get the viewers they deserve.  I just hope it’s not another case of “Arrested Development”-itis (a show that also had a small cult following and won numerous awards, yet had its third season cut short and it was canceled).
So with more downfalls than highlights, what does the future hold for award shows?
I propose for no delay and also no time limit for the show. Let the people run their mouths. They’ve put in their time and should be able to say whatever they want.
Also, it should be more of a gong show for the host. If one bombs, let someone who actually knows what they are doing get up there.
Or even perhaps incorporate a vote-off system, which we adore so much on “Survivor.”  God knows how much we love seeing people kill themselves to be voted off by some crazy old man who should obviously be dead by now (why would a casting director put a 65-year-old man with a heart condition on a survival show, I have no idea).
Maybe live animals should be incorporated or even streakers for that matter?  Or in fact, maybe Soy Bomb should make another appearance to really steal the show.
I just don’t know how much more Ryan Seacrest I can take.
Honestly, though, the show bombed and viewers found themselves once again disappointed at another botched effort by producers.
I can only plead the producers to do something to spice up these once-entertaining-now-dying award shows.
There is only so much meaningless dialogue and dry humor one viewer can take.
However, if you do catch yourself caught in the midst of a boring award show, I recommend flipping to the Home Shopping Network to learn about RONCO’s new grill (which by the way, I suggest picking up).
Les Mooney is a senior graphic design major from Davenport, Iowa. He is the Scout graphics editor.
Direct questions, comments and other responses to
Copyright © 2023, The Scout, Bradley University. All rights reserved.
The Scout is published by members of the student body of Bradley University. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the University.