A Case for Globes Race New­com­ers

Series and stars that missed their shot at Emmy in Septem­ber will likely rack up year-end noms

Variety - - Exposure | Dirt Parties Wwd Report Card Devour - BY CARO­LINE FRAMKE

WITH NEW SERIES POP­PING up across plat­forms seem­ingly ev­ery other day, at least one thing is cer­tain: the tra­di­tional TV “sea­son” as we once knew it is no longer the in­dus­try’s go-to stan­dard. Broad­cast shows that run from Septem­ber through May, once the norm, now make up a van­ish­ingly small por­tion of what comes out ev­ery year as more and more net­works across ca­ble and stream­ing turn to smaller episode counts and higher-pro­file creative teams that can do­nate their time in shorter bursts. This new wave of TV isn’t nearly as be­holden to tra­di­tional sched­ules as the old guard, and as such, come out when their providers see fit, not when they might oth­er­wise be ex­pected.

So when it comes to hand­ing out TV ac­co­lades, the Golden Globes have ac­ci­den­tally on pur­pose found them­selves with an ad­van­tage. While the Em­mys tend to op­er­ate more to­ward the tra­di­tional sched­ule by cut­ting sub­mis­sions off in June and hand­ing out the awards in Septem­ber, the Globes op­er­ate by the cal­en­dar year. They can award shows that feel more im­me­di­ately rel­e­vant, and as such, just might be in a more timely po­si­tion in these wild, bound­ary­less TV times.

Take “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.” Its sec­ond sea­son tech­ni­cally comes out just a day be­fore the Globes’ Dec. 6 nom­i­na­tions an­nounce­ment, but HFPA mem­bers will no doubt get ad­vance ac­cess to sea­son two, es­pe­cially since they were the first to rec­og­nize it and star Rachel Bros­na­han, who won the highly com­pet­i­tive com­edy ac­tress tro­phy back in Jan­uary. Even if the show doesn’t get quite as much at­ten­tion this sec­ond time around, its chances for recog­ni­tion are still good, pend­ing a to­tal col­lapse of the show, which seems un­likely.

Still, the most ob­vi­ous ben­e­fi­cia­ries of the Globes’ sched­ule are the shows that, for what­ever rea­son, JUST missed the Em­mys’ mid­sum­mer dead­line. And this year, there are some big — and ex­tremely wor­thy — con­tenders in ex­actly that po­si­tion. “Bet­ter Call Saul,” for in­stance, seemed like an un­for­giv­able Em­mys omis­sion that had ac­tu­ally just skated around the el­i­gi­bil­ity win­dow. But it has an­other shot to as­sert it­self with the Globes, or, more cyn­i­cally, an­other shot to get snubbed and stir out­rage among its pas­sion­ate fans, should it get over­looked.

An­other ob­vi­ous Globes con­tender that couldn’t com­pete at the Em­mys is “Sharp Ob­jects,” HBO’S slow-burn drama boast­ing tal­ent in­clud­ing Amy Adams, Chris Messina and Pa­tri­cia Clark­son — not to men­tion direc­tor Jean-marc Val­lée, fresh off helm­ing Globes fa­vorite “Big Lit­tle Lies.” The Em­mys’ lim­ited series cat­e­gory this year was weaker than usual, and the Globes has the op­por­tu­nity to pick up the slack by rec­og­niz­ing the sly smarts of “Sharp Ob­jects.”

Plus: if HFPA vot­ers see fit to award Adams with a tro­phy, they’ll be beat­ing the Os­cars to it, and that HAS to be ap­peal-

FX’S 1980s ball­room cul­ture drama ”Pose” pre­miered in June, just miss­ing the Emmy el­i­gi­bil­ity win­dow and mak­ing the Globes its first chance for awards recog­ni­tion.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.