Orphan Black in the Media

[shapeshifter]

@ElectricBoogaloo, ♥LOVE♥ the making of the clone dance video!

Here's a recap of the finale from io9 with clone dance gifs from "the Orphan Black Tumblr": http://io9.com/holy-crap-orphan-blacks-season-finale-changes-everythi-1594493802

[jaybear1701]

The OB cast and crew have been flooding twitter today with selfies thanking the Clone Club. It is super cute. A sampling: Tatiana, Michiel, Maria (love the fork & knife. Ha!), Evelyne, Kristian, and Josh.

[hardy har]

In terms of how they interact with fans and stuff I think this might be the most collectively adorable cast and crew ever. LOL at Kristian's "farting, murdering Donnie" scribble. Hee!

 

Also......hey there, Josh Vokey. Scott is kinda hot, you guys.

Edited June 24, 2014 by hardy har

[lulee]

In terms of how they interact with fans and stuff I think this might be the most collectively adorable cast and crew ever. LOL at Kristian's "farting, murdering Donnie" scribble. Hee!

Also......hey there, Josh Vokey. Scott is kinda hot, you guys.

ooh - totally didn't recognize josh/Scott! Lookin' good!

[maraleia]

Tatiana with her clone doubles http://www.zap2it.com/blogs/orphan_black_clone_dance_tatiana_maslany_body_double_pictures-2014-06

[DioxinBlues]

If you haven't read this excellent article from Vanity Fair - "Why Is Orphan Black Still Fighting a War Buffy Should Have Won Over 10 Years Ago?" - I encourage you to do so: http://www.vanityfair.com/vf-hollywood/orphan-black-fighting-buffy-war?mbid=social_twitter

[maraleia]

Cool video...http://www.avclub.com/article/young-clone-reenacted-orphan-blacks-dance-party-206372

[Kaboom 2.0]

Omg thank you for posting the vid, maraleia, that was BEYOND adorable.

And young Rachel at the end! LOL

[Wilowy]

Ha ha! That was great, @maraleia!

[The Crazed Spruce]

Cute. :)

[Wilowy]

Article in NYMag/Vulture about Helena:

 

http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/07/introducing-tvs-best-female-monster-yet.html?mid=facebook_vulture

[Loandbehold]

There isn't an awards thread, so I thought I'd mention here that The Emmy nominations are being announced this Thursday. http://www.emmys.com/events/2014-emmy-nominations-announcement What we need is some proactive Angelinos to build catapults, obtain large rocks, and amass our legions to be prepared to storm the castle where the announcements will take place. If TM doesn't get a nom, that'll be the cue to launch the offensive.

[Wilowy]

Here's the award show thread! http://forums.previously.tv/topic/7986-award-shows-the-envelope-please/

 

And I absolutely cannot even think for one second that Tat won't get a nom. The last thing I can ever imagine is that little acting powerhouse becoming the next Susan Lucci. She HAS to get a nomination, they can't ignore her again.

[thuganomics85]

Not a huge surprise, but BBC America "officially" renewed the show for a third season.  Looks like it will be another 10 episode season.

[ottoDbusdriver]

Not a huge surprise, but BBC America "officially" renewed the show for a third season.  Looks like it will be another 10 episode season.

 

But it's awesome news -- at least one more year of #Cloneclub.

[thuganomics85]

And.... again, no nomination for Tatiana Maslany.  I give up; the Emmy voters are so lame.

[lulee]

All in favor of sending Helena after the voters who didn't vote for Tatiana, say "aye!"

[Valny]

And.... again, no nomination for Tatiana Maslany.  I give up; the Emmy voters are so lame.

Eff them!   In our hearts, she gets the vote and win!

[topanga]

All in favor of sending Helena after the voters who didn't vote for Tatiana, say "aye!"

 

Aye!!!! The Emmys have become a popularity contest, not an accurate display of quality TV. But maybe they (and all other awards shows) have been that way for years. This one really hurts. How could you not at least nominate Tatiana Maslany for an Emmy? She's the best actress on television right now. I don't think I'll bother to watch the show this year. I'll still be rooting for Don Cheadle, but that's not enough to make me watch this joke of an awards show.

[Wilowy]

Most of the Emmy voters are old, out of touch white people. Not exactly OB's demographic. This is patently unfair and I no longer care who wins. I'm boycotting. 

Onward! To the SAG awards in January!!

[Valny]

I would have replaced Michelle Dockery from ,Downton Abbey for TM! 

[phoenix780]

I don't think the demographics of the Emmy voters are why she got robbed.  The show isn't on Netflix, which we all have to embrace because it's the cool new way to watch television (y'know, by watching it on your phone or tablet).  It's not on pay cable, so it can't get "realistic" with swear words and female nudity.  There's buzz about the show, but it's got a bit of an old-school approach because they don't kill off major characters to prove that it's high-stakes drama (and, again, no swearing/breasts).  And there's buzz around the actress, but she's not famous enough outside of television to validate the Emmys.

 

It just doesn't fit, really, with what these awards are about.  Which is a shame, because all she'd need is one nomination to get nominated every year the show is on.  And her performance deserves that, imho.

[Artsda]

Tatiana being snubbed is ridiculous. Kerry Washington over her? What a joke. 

[beedub]

While I do find this disappointing, mostly for Tatiana's sake, as some recognition from the establishment would be wonderful, I can't say I'm shocked, and for two reasons.

 

One, and you've heard it before, that Emmy voters don't tend to reward genre shows. Say what you will about The Walking Dead, there have been some excellent performances, and it has been perennially ignored despite its popularity. Game of Thrones is the exception, because it's such an unstoppable juggernaut. Voters follow the money.

 

Two, although TM does an incredible job, I don't think those in the "Academy" can see past the technology, makeup and wardrobe in her performance, and likely think of it as some kind of stunt. The only recent comparison I can think of is Toni Colette in United States of Tara, when she had a couple of nominations and a win, but being in the Comedy category no doubt helped her stand out, as the competition seems much tougher amongst dramatic actors.

 

Having said all that, we do have a Season Three, and hope springs eternal!

[Wilowy]

Well, they do show everyone's butts. And my favorite line of last season was "Helena, don't jump out and scare us with an ax or some shit!", so there is swearing. I haven't heard any "effs" yet, though. 

[Blackie]

I would have replaced Michelle Dockery from ,Downton Abbey for TM!

Its kind of ironic that TM's real life boyfriend was one of Lady's Mary's suitors  even though MD just walked around the whole time with a sour puss. (that is some acting!). Hopefully if Lord Gillingham will put Lady Mary in her place  (which should be way behind TM!!).

 

How can an actress who has won the critics choice award not even be nominated for an Emmy, makes NO sense at all.

Edited July 10, 2014 by Blackie

[beedub]

 And there's buzz around the actress, but she's not famous enough outside of television to validate the Emmys.

 

Good point, as this year's nominees are all very well established names, with only Lizzy Caplan perhaps less so, though she does have a long credits list, and maybe Michelle Dockery. But she has a high profile in Downton, a show with huge recognition, respect and momentum. And a dog's butt.

Edited July 10, 2014 by beedub

[ALenore]

An article by Scott Feinberg in the Hollywood Reporter makes some good points about the Emmys

 

1) They come out of nowhere. There are not months of festivals, awards shows and promotional events leading up to them, as there are with the Oscars. The Golden Globe Awards and Screen Actors Guild Awards recognize TV categories, but they do so a half-year before the TV Academy (meaning that many episodes and even seasons are not considered by the former but are by the latter), with which they have very little demographic overlap anyway. And the TV Critics' Choice Awards and TCA Awards both occur closer to the Emmy nominations announcement, but they are determined by critics, not TV-makers.

 

2) They are chosen by a massive and mixed group. Whereas the film Academy is comprised of roughly 6,000 members, who each belong to one of 17 branches, the TV Academy is comprised of roughly 15,000 people, many of whom have only loose connections to the industry. The size and diversity of the membership, on top of the paucity of other award shows through which those members express their preferences prior to the Emmy nominations—unlike Oscar voters, who tend to belong to guilds that announce nominees and winners for their own awards ceremonies before the Academy's—makes it virtually impossible to figure out how they're leaning.

3) They are the product of an impossible task. Nobody—not even the most diligent TV Academy member—can see all of the shows and individuals eligible for awards consideration, or even come close. And yet they vote. For this reason, high-profile shows tend to be highlighted and then recognized year after year. But, every once in a while, the members, en masse, gravitate toward and champion newcomers and/or underdogs and/or shows that have already been canceled.

 

Orphan Black is on BBC America, a channel a lot of people dont' even get.  And while we who watch the show are cerainly aware of Tatiana's performance, for most of the voters she just another actress on a show they haven't gotten around to seeing yet. 

Edited July 10, 2014 by ALenore

[Neurochick]

 

Orphan Black is on BBC America, a channel a lot of people dont' even get.  And while we who watch the show are cerainly aware of Tatiana's performance, for most of the voters she just another actress on a show they haven't gotten around to seeing yet.

 

I kind of see that but...following that thought, how can they nominate shows on HBO or Showtime, two channels that many people in the country can't even afford?  I have neighbors who love Game of Thrones, but can't watch it live because HBO's too expensive, so they have to wait for the DVD's. 

[lulee]

While I do find this disappointing, mostly for Tatiana's sake, as some recognition from the establishment would be wonderful, I can't say I'm shocked, and for two reasons.

 

One, and you've heard it before, that Emmy voters don't tend to reward genre shows. Say what you will about The Walking Dead, there have been some excellent performances, and it has been perennially ignored despite its popularity. Game of Thrones is the exception, because it's such an unstoppable juggernaut. Voters follow the money.

And being on HBO is a huge factor. BBCAmerica doesn't carry weight with voter, doesn't have the PR that other big networks have. So TM's odds were definitely hampered by that. I had seen her mentioned as a nominee by several sources. So I'd like to think that she was at least first-runner, close, even if that only counts in horseshoes and handgrenades, as my dad would say.

[ALenore]

, how can they nominate shows on HBO or Showtime, two channels that many people in the country can't even afford?

 

And being on HBO is a huge factor. BBCAmerica doesn't carry weight with voter, doesn't have the PR that other big networks have

 

As Scott Feinberg point #3,  the voters have a huge task of watching all the shows out there (which is impossible). So they go with the shows whose PR department can create more buzz.  I'm sure it's possible for them to watch anything on HBO, Showtime or BBC even if they aren't a subscriber, but given that they only have a certain amount of hours of TV they can watch, they choose the shows that get more publicity (Game of Thrones gets mentioned on network news).

[Mama No Life]

I'm pissed, pissed, PISSED  that stupid, pouty Kerry Washington was nominated and Tatiana Maslany was not.  If TM only portrayed ONE character she would still kick KW and Julianne Marguiles's asses. pissedpissedpissedpissed

[Wilson Cat]

Mama No Life wrote:

 

I'm pissed, pissed, PISSED  that stupid, pouty Kerry Washington was nominated and Tatiana Maslany was not.  If TM only portrayed ONE character she would still kick KW and Julianne Marguiles's asses. pissedpissedpissedpissed

 

This whole thing just reeks.  I tried to watch Scandal, and couldn't get through the very first episode due to the one-dimensional portrayal by Kerry Washington of the tough gal attorney who has only one facial expression.  Katharine McPhee could do as well in the role, and she's a doorknob.  Who the hell is on the nominating committee for the Emmy awards?  How could anyone not see how beyond amazing Maslany is in Orphan Black?!?  The moment I clicked on the nominations and saw she had not been nominated I face palmed.  Stupid stupid stupid stupid stupid.

[Mama No Life]

And I don't buy the BBC excuse...both Luther, which wasn't very good in series 3, and Idris Elba (whom I ADORE) were nominated.

[RachelKM]

I am only surprised by the failure of the Emmy community to nominate TM to the extent that the failure to nominate her last year was widely seen as one of the Emmy voters' biggest errors of 2013 and the buzz for the show and TM has only grown from there.

 

But for that, I've grown accustomed to the fact that Emmy voters may be the least adventurous, most passive group on the planet.  If something was good for them last year, it seems they will just hit the same buttons for the same shows and actors forever until quality drops to a degree that the continued voting for them is completely unsupportable and/or they go off the air, no matter what else may come along in the meantime.

Edited July 11, 2014 by RachelKM

[Wilowy]

I am only surprised by the failure of the Emmy community to nominate TM to the extent that the failure to nominate her last year was widely seen as one of the Emmy voters' biggest errors of 2013 and the buzz for the show and TM has only grown from there.

 

Yes, right? It's like, "HEY ASSHOLES! Remember when you didn't vote for her last year and everyone shit down your neck?? SAME SHOW! SAME WOMAN!

 

A friend who writes for TV was all "Yeah, TVQ is everything for the Emmy voters."

 

Neat. So how does anything good that isn't a leviathan EVER get recognized? UGH!

[ottoDbusdriver]

Yes, right? It's like, "HEY ASSHOLES! Remember when you didn't vote for her last year and everyone shit down your neck?? SAME SHOW! SAME WOMAN!

 

A friend who writes for TV was all "Yeah, TVQ is everything for the Emmy voters."

 

Neat. So how does anything good that isn't a leviathan EVER get recognized? UGH!

 

Plus, Orphan Black won a Peabody since last year's Emmy Awards which in addition to fans clamoring for attention should have made the Emmy nominations board sit up and take notice that maybe there's more to Orphan Black.

[OriginalCyn]

Plus, Orphan Black won a Peabody since last year's Emmy Awards which in addition to fans clamoring for attention should have made the Emmy nominations board sit up and take notice that maybe there's more to Orphan Black.

 

Battlestar Galactica was another show that was snubbed year after year, and it not only earned a Peabody, the cast was asked to have a round-table discussion at the UN.

 

Seriously, though, Michelle Dockery gets a nomination for moping around the entire season?  And don't get me started on Kerry Washington.

 

ETA:  Tatiana is front and center (complete with photo) on the CBS Network's website about Emmy snubs.

 

Good.  I hope there's some serious, high-publicity outrage and backlash about this.

 

EATA:  

 

Tatiana is also the poster child and first mention on CNN's article about Emmy snubs:

 

 

 

It seemed like a no-brainer. Last year's omission of Tatiana Maslany, the uber-talented lead actress from BBC America's sci-fi hit "Orphan Black," left fans in fits of rage. The self-proclaimed Clone Club -- named after the actress' multiple clone characters -- did everything short of picketing the red carpet. Now, that she has been left out a second time, all bets are off.

Fans were so affected by the snub that #EmmyForMaslany was a trending topic on Twitter for much of Thursday morning.

For those who watch the show, this outrage shouldn't be too much of a surprise. The actress impressively portrays more than six characters, and sometimes, all of those characters appear in the same scene. Sure, stand-ins and special effects offer a bit of assistance, but Maslany inhabits her characters so fully, it's easy to forget there aren't different actresses on screen. From reckless Sarah Manning to neurotic soccer mom Alison Hendrix, all the way to free-spirited scientist Cosima Niehaus, Maslany seamlessly jumps from one to the next. Who could forget that incredible dance scene in the Season 2 finale featuring four clones?

 

 

 

Ditto for the L.A. Times (complete with picture of Helena):

Perhaps no group was more outraged than fans of BBC America’s “Orphan Black,” who were reaching for their pitchforks when Tatiana Maslany, who plays close to a dozen different parts in the sci-fi series, was overlooked in the drama actress category for the second straight year. The Canadian actress has won fervent critical acclaim for her chameleonic performance as a group of wildly different clones, as well as smaller prizes such as the Critics’ Choice Television Award, but has yet to earn recognition from the famously habit-prone voters of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences.

 

But Maslany and her admirers can take heart knowing that she was passed over in a what one of this year’s most fiercely competitive categories..

 

 

That last part had my eyes rolling into the back of my skull.  Seriously LAT?  I take *NO* fucking heart in that.

 

The Boston Globe headlines with Tatiana being snubbed :

 

We need to talk about Tatiana.

 

[N]o snub was more surprising — and absurd and silly and fickle — than the absence of a nomination for Tatiana Maslany. This is a snub of epic proportions. As the lead in BBC America’s “Orphan Black,” she is wondrous, playing each of her clones with depth, clarity, commitment, and enthusiasm. Seriously, she gives one of the best TV performances in years, and the Emmys look foolish and stubborn for pretending it doesn’t exist. If you don’t believe me, try the show, a camp sci-fi character drama, and you’ll understand.

 

 

 

Yahoo also brings up Tatiana:

 

 

 

Tatiana Maslany

She has won back-to-back Critics' Choice Awards and a Television Critics Association Award, and has scored Golden Globes and People's Choice Award nominations. How many different characters does the Orphan Black star have to play to win herself some Emmy recognition?

 

Every single article about Emmy snubs I found on Google mentions Tatiana.  Every. Single. One.  Between this and The Americans (along with Matthew Rhys and Keri Russell, which is also being brought up in every article), the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences can go fuck themselves.

Edited July 11, 2014 by OriginalCyn

[Indi]

*sigh* What can I say? I'm really sad, but it's the same resigned sadness I felt, when Battlestar Galactica got repeatedly snubbed, which is exactly what I think will happen with Orphan Black and Tatiana, as this IO9 article states: Why Orphan Black's Tatiana Maslany Will Always Be Snubbed by the Emmys And that's why the Emmys are mostly a waste of time.
 
But back to the show for a minute. I loved S2 for the most part, but I think it lost something from S1. I don't know how to call it, freshness maybe? At times I felt they were trying too hard and some things felt contrived in a really bad way. I'm probably wrong, but sometimes I felt the showrunners bought into all the Emmy hype last year and some of their choices in S2 had a lot to do with coveting an Emmy nomination. IF this is so, I hope this was their wake up call and rethink those choices for S3.

[Haleth]

But for that, I've grown accustomed to the fact that Emmy voters may be the least adventurous, most passive group on the planet.  If something was good for them last year, it seems they will just hit the same buttons for the same shows and actors forever until quality drops to a degree that the continued voting for them is completely unsupportable and/or they go off the air, no matter what else may come along in the meantime.

 

Exactly.  It's lazy.  Michelle Dockery?  She can barely play one character (or let's say a character with more than one expression).  There is no contest between her and Tatiana Maslany.  (And I agree about the snubs of Keri Russell and Matthew Rhys too.  They are superb in their roles.)

[stillshimpy]

Jeez Louise, if Tatiana Maslany's work playing -- at a bare minimum -- four different characters in a lead capacity can't get a nod, then it's pretty much official: the Emmy's don't really hate  "genre" shows, they just can't stand anything they can deem science-fiction. For some reason my beloved scifi remains the redheaded stepchild of the awards world.  Despite actually requiring more imagination and range to bring to life, because there's only parts of a reality base that we know to attach a performance to.  Maslany's plowing new emotional territory in acting about identity and self, but didn't get nominated over the Heathcliff and Cathy, the Whitehouse Years show?  Come on.  That's about clique voting and how the scifi actors aren't at the cool kids lunch table.   

 

BSG did some great stuff and I wish it had seen some award action, but it always had something damned near insurmountable to overcome: most people heard the title and thought "They remade that 70s cheez-whiz show, and we're supposed to take it seriously? Bwhwhaahahaha.  No. Thank you."  So as much as it sucked that it was so often roundly ignored, at least I could figure out (or make up) a reason why it struggled to be taken seriously.  I could tell myself that it had its name to overcome and that kept killing it in the days when it was a great show (it slipped a lot towards the end, I felt). 

 

But this?  Yeah.  Last year I could buy the "well, no one had heard of it yet", this year, no way.  Juliana Marguiles is a fine actor and I've nothing against her. I can see why she was nominated, she had the material this year.  Kerry Washington is similarly a talented woman, but her material this year was pure shit, almost the exact same crap she's been playing for three years, only this time she had to act it out from behind strategically placed potted plants and desk lamps in the world's most absurd and distracting attempt to cover a lead actor's pregnancy.  

 

I'm supposed to buy that voters really thought "Wow, she's killing it here, a gift from the acting gods!" for Washington, when in reality, anyone with actual eyeballs was way too busy saying "What the actual fuck is the director doing?? Why all the long shots?  Just do a bunch of closeups and body double her otherwise, what the hell?"  to notice whether or not Washington was doing any kind of solid work.  She was fine, it's just the same exact crap she's played for three seasons.  "White hats!" "Stand in the Sun!"  "Jam and Vermont, I long for you!"  

 

It's not actually that I wish to insult any other actor as being unworthy, but I think even Kerry Washington would admit "Oh yeah, love my show.  Thank you academy.  What an honor and by the way?  It would be way the fuck tougher to do Maslany's job."  As for Michelle Dockery, sure it's actually very challenging to try and bring an emotionally distant and inaccessible human being to life and she gives a convincingly chilly performance, but again, it's one role and it relies on having tremendous emotional restraint as an actor.  It's not that she has a cake job, it's that if you're really looking to reward excellence in The Craft, it's not even in the same universe as what Maslany has to pull off.  

 

I'm done throwing my tantrum over here, I promise.  But man, way to reward the ordinary and ignore the extraordinary, Emmy Voters.  

Edited July 11, 2014 by stillshimpy

[Shermie]

Most of the Emmy voters are old, out of touch white people. Not exactly OB's demographic.

 

As an old (over 50) white person, I beg to differ (not on the Emmy voters part, but on the demographic part). 

 

The snub is ridiculous and all those media quotes - with TM and OB as the Emmy snub poster child - are bang on. It was understandable after season one, but the show is not the obscure little nobody anymore. And it is the Emmy voter's job to watch the shows; why accept the position if you're not going to do it?

 

It has seemed for decades that Emmy voters are lazy. The same show/actors win year after year - remember when Candice Bergen actually took her name out of contention because she would automatically win. Never mind that there were a host of good sitcoms with talented female leads; it's as if the voters just looked at their ballot and saw Bergen's name and thought, "Oh yeah, she's good, she won last year." Check! The same thing seems to happen with Modern Family winning best comedy; it had a couple good years but last year was weak and it still wins? Please. (And I enjoy MF, but that doesn't make it award-worthy)

[beedub]

@OriginalCyn: I can see how you spent your day yesterday.  ;-)

[possibilities]

Maybe the Emmy voters are just too dim to perceive that it's the same actress playing all those characters. it's like her acting went over their heads.

[Cyranetta]

And the fact that sometimes the characters are themselves acting other characters (which, I would submit, takes the excellence of the acting to an entirely different level!) must really be beyond their comprehension, certainly beyond their appreciation.

[BigDfromLA]

Tatiana's brilliance on this show has NOTHING to do with makeup or costumes. For someone to think that is complete ignorance. She amazingly brings a unique level of humanity and personality to each of her characters, especially in challenging scenes where they interact with each other. Her most amazing brilliance is how she handles one clone "pretending" to be another, which has happened a few times. I don't think any of the actresses nominated could come close to pulling that off. The Emmy voters are completely out to lunch.

[dampfire]

What?  What the...  WTF!!!
 

When I scrolled down the list (on some site or another) of Best Actress Nominees, I really did think it was a mere formality.  I thought her name, a foregone conclusion, would be there.  Despite the reservations and misgivings so many had expressed beforehand.  But it wasn't there.  Her name, it wasn't there.
 

Pissed?  I am.  And was.  I was, but I wasn't immediately.  Because my initial impulse after perusing that list was...to laugh.  It was so damn absurd that I couldn't help myself.
 

And to tell you the truth, I was almost (but only almost) as pissed that Keri Russell didn't get nominated either.  As far as I'm concerned, Tat, Keri, and Eva Green (Penny Dreadful) gave this year's top performances in this category.  And none, alas, was even nominated. 
 

Talking to my sister a couple weeks back, I told her that I'd actually be more pissed if Tat got nominated and didn't win than I would be if she didn't get nominated at all.  A nomination would put her officially on the radar.  Once on the radar, how then could her clear and present eminence be ignored?  And I'll stand by that (pissed though still I am).
 

I mean, at least I can muddle through the rationale leading to no nom.  BBCA: obscure with no real rep or track record.  Genre bias.  Cult status and comparatively meager ratings numbers.  Hollywood politics.  The a priori assumption that the multiple character turn would be, had to be more gimmick than genius.
 

Last year, while disappointed (pissed!), I at least understood why what happened happened.  The rationale.  Just figured that, after last year's uproar (from fans and critics alike), the Emmy voters might kind of collectively find themselves wondering what all the clamor was about and say to themselves, "Um, hey, maybe we oughta actually watch this show before we dismiss...what's her name again?" 
 

Yeah, right. 
 

Seriously though.  After hearing and reading all the gushing raves about Tat's performance(s), why oh why wouldn't you want to find out if these audacious claims were valid...in any way?  If such a thing as this were actually happening in the here and now...why wouldn't you want to see it for yourself?  And fuck simply watching in order to make a fair and objective assessment.  Pure selfishness would seem motivation enough.  Why willingly (obstinately) miss a miracle?
 

Trying to explain this miracle to a friend recently, I somewhat desperately told her to reimagine The L Word.  Not so much the show itself.  Not the specifics, but the "Who's your favorite Beatle?" character dynamics.  Then I told her to imagine a show on which Bette and Tina and Alice and Dana and Shane and Jenny and Helena and Max (and others) are all played by the same actress.  I told her to imagine that and to imagine it working beyond her wildest imaginings.  If she could somehow manage to imagine that, I told her, then she might begin to understand the miracle that is Tatiana Maslany.
 

There's a lot of crap on TV.   But I wouldn't be the first to acknowledge that we're also living in something of a television golden age.  With that in mind, I'm going to easily resist the temptation to bash any of the actual nominees.  Kudos and congrats to Robin and Julianna and Claire and Kerry and Michelle and Lizzy.  Stellar work all.   Truly.  This, as is, is one kick-ass list. 
 

But this is not a matter of who should be bumped off the list to make room for Tat (and Keri and Eva).  Could be any or all of them.  Because to me this, again, really isn't as much about the nominations as it's about who should win.  And who should win is obvious.  To all but the oblivious.
 

I've seen The Godfather.  And Robert De Niro in Raging Bull.  And Meryl Streep in Sophie's Choice.  I saw Bryan Cranston pull Walter White out of Hal Wilkerson's ass, then Heisenberg out of Walter White's.  And I've watched The Wire more times than I'm willing to comfortably admit.  Now I have the honor and opportunity to watch Tatianna Maslany on Orphan Black.
 

What's there to be pissed about?
 

Well...don't get me started.

 

PDA: Apparently Penny Dreadful wasn't eligible for or didn't submit to the Emmys this year.  Something, something,something about not enough eps having aired before the Emmy cutoff date.  Or somethng.  Therefore,  my above comments about Eva Green being snubbed too don't really apply.  My bad.

 

 

Edited July 12, 2014 by dampfire

[RachelKM]

I too am upset about Keri Russell's snub*.  But I just don't have the energy reservoir to get worked up about Keri after my freak out over Tatiana's omission.  I mean, What The Actual Fuck?!! It does not compute.  Even as amazing and deserving of a nomination as Keri is on The Americans (and Matthew Rhys too, I truly love that show), she plays ONE part superbly. Tatiana is playing FIVE plus.

 

*Though I actually thought Keri's season one work was better, but not so much because of her performance as the material.  Season Two was great too, but Elizabeth's development in Season One was fascinating and compelling.

[Catch 22]

Like so many others I felt disgusted that Tatiana Maslany was egregiously cheated (again) of an Emmy nomination. And I will say cheated because, in my opinion, that describes what happened exactly. There is more than one actress named on the nominee list that didn't earn the right to be there. And the fact remains that none of them, not one, has had to do the self-differentiating and disparate shades of character(s) Maslany is challeged to do.

 

Additionally, because of the number of different people she plays Tatiana does, at minimum, three to five times as much work with far fewer or, sometimes any, people to act opposite. I'd love to see each of the current nominees try and act opposite a tennis ball and bring anything close to the refined performance she gives.

 

Each character/clone she portrays, while facially identical, still has their own distinctive way of walking and talking with unique facial movements and hand mannerisms who can convey the same emotion in wildly differing ways. Which is mind blowing when you compare it with the acting choices of some of the nominees who use the same facial expressions, tone of voice and hand movements when trying to convey entirely differing emotions.

 

So perhaps it's actually less the sci-fi genre that kept Maslany from getting an Emmy nomination, but rather her out of this world performance that was too multi-layered to be understood by those with one dimensional minds. Maybe between now and next year Tatiana can start a cumulative mind-meld with the Emmy voting participants and finally achieve the nomination and ultimate win that all of her admirers wish for her.

 

To paraphrase Sarah Manning-- Get your shit together, you silly tits.

[stillshimpy]

So perhaps it's actually less the sci-fi genre that kept Maslany from getting an Emmy nomination, but rather her out of this world performance that was too multi-layered to be understood by those with one dimensional minds.

 

Heh.  Although I completely feel you on the urge to put it down to "What the hell, Voters?  Are you just stupid?"  because it really is that frustrating when incredibly difficult work, done well, is overlooked.  However, I know that whenever someone I genuinely like wins, these are the same folks I'm cheering for having great taste with a "Hell yeah!"  for Aaron Paul's win.   So basically I'm just pissed and do not believe that the real answer is that Emmy voters are too unsophisticated or stupid to grasp genuinely good work,.

 

If I truly believed that was the case, I'd just ignore the Emmys altogether as being entirely silly and not worth my notice.  Sort of like I do with MTV awards, or Teen Spirit Awards or People's Choice awards.  Don't get me wrong, those are all nice awards shows and it's lovely for work to see recognition, but I don't give them any weight or merit in terms of "judged by their peers, they were found to be worthy of accolades, this is so nice!" 

 

That's what makes the Emmys frustrating.  Yeah, it's a HUGE voting pool, but it is done by people who are connected to the industry and by fellow actors.  It pisses me off because I know darned well they actually are sophisticated enough and knowledgeable enough about the entire process to get the full scope of what goes into Tatiana Maslany's work.  She's rarely playing opposite a tennis ball, by the way,  there are several stand-ins at this point.  So she's often playing off a wigged stand-in, then they reshoot the scene switching clone roles to a different standin.  It's actually not unusual for scenes to be shot multiple times, from many angles, it's just unusual for one actor to have to switch around and play the other role in the re-shoot.  Tennis balls only come into play for things like CGI'd dragons, or Dobby the Elf in Harry Potter.  Fully computer generated images. 

 

I guess I was and remain irked (peeved, vexed, I'm cooling down basically) because sometimes the Emmy voters do try to get it right; do make a collective effort to step outside of the known and recognize the new.  House of Cards had a crappy second season, but I was pleased as hell when the voters took note of the first season.   When Aaron Paul won (the first time) I nearly fell the hell off the couch.  The whole success story behind Breaking Bad -- a show about cooking Meth, I didn't even watch it that first season because the premise sounded so repulsive -- proves that they are capable of looking at the actual work rather than being put off solely by descriptions. 

 

So that's part of what makes this so disappointing.  The Emmy Voters have, in recent years, expanded their scope to include things outside the mainstream.  I thought there was a real chance they wouldn't just dismiss the premise as gimmicky.   I'll also be honest here, when I heard the premise, I thought "Oh jeez, but sure, I'm there...."  because I love scifi.  I didn't expect it to be stellar and I'd heard the hype about the first season and thought "No way is this woman as good as they say she is" and I was right: she was even better than the hype.  

 

I was just talking to Paramitch about this elsewhere:  we've both watched BSG and are no strangers to an actor really bringing it in clone/multiple copies of themselves roles.  It was't just that challenge that impressed the living hell out of of me about Maslany, in fact, I had a sort of blase "eh, yeah, I've seen that..." feeling before I actually saw it.  Then it was a case of "Oh holy living acting gods, this woman is beyond gifted, I honestly forget it is the same actor in each clone role at times."  

 

Anyway, I get that the premise might not grab the Voters.  It can sound like a gimmick.  The only gimmicky thing I felt the show did was the Tony clone, but that was just the way it was developed (poorly, I felt) and the chances that the Voters even saw that are slimmer than hell.  I sincerely doubt one small misstep was the problem. 

 

It's frustrating because if anyone familiar with acting sees what she's doing, it's so incredibly clear "Oh my god, she's been blessed by the acting gods themselves!" So I sort of have to assume that most of them voters passed over the submissions based on the premise.