The
Emmy nominations have hit. The thing about them that bugs me is the placement of
Desperate Housewives in the comedy category - I'm not sure what makes it a comedy. It's engrossing television, and there are comedic bits, but that does not make a comedy. It's certainly satire, but that does not make it a comedy. The format is the hourlong drama. What happens between the characters is attractive for its dramatic potential, not its comedic potential (contrast with
Friends, which riffed on relationships with a clear comedic spin - the same intent is lacking in
Desperate Housewives). Most importantly, I don't find it all that funny, and God knows it's structured more onlong the lines of the classic tragedy rather than a comedy. In a comedy, everyone lives happily ever after, in a tragedy someone dies. I can't imagine everyone living happily ever after in
Desperate Housewives, but I can see the sins of the characters catching up with them. Is the nominations committee stupid?
Since
Desparate Houswives does not fit any decent definition of a
comedy, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that
Disney paid the nominations committee off so that both its brand new hit shows can get their very own Emmys their first time out. But that seems even dumber than thinking
Desperate Housewives is a comedy, so I'm going with "they're stupid."
The only other thing to catch my eye: Quentin Tarantino is nominated for best director for the
CSI finale. He probably deserves the nod here, because he put his stamp on the episode while retaining the look and feel of
CSI. Of course, if he was even nominated for writer, it would be a travesty - I enjoyed the finale thouroughly, but I've been more about style over substance for a
while. It was a one hour plot stretched over two that would've collapsed under its own weight in lesser hands.
