Monday, September 24, 2012
Why Breaking Bad and Not Homeland Should Have Won Best Drama
I have nothing against the show Homeland. I mean, I don't find it interesting--The two or three episodes I saw didn't grip me--but there are a lot of shows I don't enjoy but still respect, like Mad Men. It's good enough, I guess. The critics like it. That's fine.
But there is no way Homeland should have won best drama last night at the Emmys. Not in a million years. When you have a show like Breaking Bad, which until last half-season, had the best season in television history with season 4, there really is no competition. In fact, while watching season 4, I had a giddy smile on my face the entire time since I knew it was finally going to be BB's year to win best drama. How could it not when it was changing the landscape of television forever with the war between Gus and Walt?
But then, it didn't win, and mostly because the new flavor of the year was around. What bull! The same thing happened with Lost on its first season. Granted, the first season of that show was pretty damn good, but best drama of the year? I'm not going to go to those lengths.
The problem is that the Emmys never award the best show when it comes to drama. The Wire, which is undoubtedly the second greatest show in history after Breaking Bad, never won best drama, either, which doesn't make any sense. Years from now, people will look at BB the same way they look at The Wire, which is as the textbook definition of greatness. With comedy, the Emmys are usually spot-on--Arrested Development would win constantly, even though it didn't do well ratings wise--but drama, not so much. It's as bad as the Academy Awards when it comes to judging in that field. The judges suck.