just finished watching the Emmy's. That Breaking Bad won again and again left me feeling disgusted. what did you think?-

[Black]

Breaking Bad is one of the highest quality TV productions that has existed in my lifetime, maybe #1.
I'm jealous of those who have never seen it, and have the concentration to stick with it (from the beginning) for at least 3-4 episodes before judging, as they have quite a treat ahead of them.

[DRR]

Black wrote:
Breaking Bad is one of the highest quality TV productions that has existed in my lifetime, maybe #1.
I'm jealous of those who have never seen it, and have the concentration to stick with it (from the beginning) for at least 3-4 episodes before judging, as they have quite a treat ahead of them.

I agree. I don't fawn all over television shows but it's difficult to argue that it's not well done - produced, directed, acted, written. It's a phenomenal show.

I understand the thinking that "the fix is in" but in my eyes it's all just a matter of hype. It's so well done that you can't possibly say "it shouldn't have won" you can only say "i prefer a different winner".

At that level of television production, anyone nominated deserves to win. I can't think of a case where someone nominated didn't deserve to be there.

[rob banzai]

There's no fix. The Academy members are just as dumb as everyone else when it comes to voting. (Not because of 'Breaking Bad', but things like giving 'Frasier' the Emmy year after year.)

[anonymouse1]

Breaking Bad fails to show the impact of the meth addiction on people's real lives. It's all exciting Heisenberg stuff, which to me is both addictive and phony.

[Blankity Blank]

RAMd®d wrote:
It seems to me that there would have to be an explanation which involves some kind of unfair trickery, don't you think?

No.

If somebody have a craps roll over four hours, I don't see why a well written, acted, and directed show can't win on merit.

I won't deny that somebody might have voted for it because it was going off the air. People can have biases for a show as well as against one.

But I don't see a high number of awards as evidence of any kind of collusion or skullduggery.

True. In the case of "Breaking Bad", I'd say the cigar is just a cigar. I found it to be one of the most, if not THE most, well written, acted and generally overall well executed pieces of entertainmet -- TV, Film, book, whatever -- I have ever had the privelege of viewing.

It gets bonus points for Aaron Paul being one of tne nicest and down to earth celebrities I've heard of in a long time. As a thank you to fans, the day of the Emmy's he put together a scavenger hunt in the Hollywood area with signed scripts and other memorabilia from the show and wrangled other actors from the show to participate. That's not the first time he's shown himself to be very self aware and appreciative regarding his success and good fortune.

Of course if the tone or direction of the show are just not appealing to you, that's completely understandable. As with anything involving taste, YMMV.

[SteveG]

I have tried to watch a series of Breaking Bad episodes a few times. It looked like they kept on repeating the same episode with minor quirks and variations over and over and over. I gave up eventually.

True Detective was somewhat interesting but the twists (and gratuitous HBO soft-core/nudity) made it look like you were watching a piece of 'cable product' rather than an involving, well-acted mystery/drama. (And wasn't the bad guy really just a rip from Silence Of The Lambs?)

In the crime genre, however, I think the British Sherlock is excellent.

[flightdelayedagain]

My wife and I mostly watch rented movies on the weekends and rarely watch any TV series. Breaking Bad was the rare exception - we both loved it. I will agree that it was rather dark but was very funny as well. Looking forward the the Better Call Saul spin-off.

[mrlynn]

I guess I should watch some of these TV shows just to see what people are talking about. Like flightdelayedagain, we watch a Saturday-night movie and that's about it for TV (aside from Special Report on FNC while fixing dinner). Nowadays if you open Netflix up to look for streaming, you are confronted with one TV series after another, and fewer movies—or so it seems. If I'm going to watch once a week, if it's a series, I want an episode that's self-contained, and not 'continued'. We did watch Foyle's War (on DVDs), which evolved over time, so should be watched in order, but an episode didn't leave you hanging.

/Mr Lynn

[Black]

anonymouse1 wrote:
Breaking Bad fails to show the impact of the meth addiction on people's real lives. It's all exciting Heisenberg stuff, which to me is both addictive and phony.

One of the amazing things about Breaking Bad is how completely effortless it is to suspend reality while watching, while never losing your grasp on the fact that you're watching a comedy.

[August West]

There is tremendous bias and apathy in the voting. You shouldn't be surprised at the people who have received awards in LaLaLand. Many votes are informed, but I would say the majority are not.