Let’s Face It, the Emmys Still Suck
Neil Patrick-Harris might be fantastic, but his hosting isn’t enough to save a tiresome awards show. Also under review: the CW’s Vampire Diaries and Twilight as assigned reading.
By Becca Russell-Einhorn, Katie Andriulli, and Emily Rutherford
September 25, 2009
NPH FTW, but the Emmys still suck.
The Emmys
CBS
Aired: Sept. 20, 2009
The reviews of this year’s Emmys all said that the award show, after years of sinking ratings, really stepped up its game. Well, they’re wrong. You don’t get points for being less terrible than you usually are. The Emmys this year were, at best, tolerable. I admit Neil Patrick Harris did a fantastic job as host, but he only shines in an award show that otherwise sucks out your soul for 2 hours, 13 minutes, and 26 seconds. And that doesn’t even include commercials so I’m really being very generous here, assuming that you used your commercial time to do something worthwhile like order a pizza.
It’s obvious that the Emmys and the Oscars have both adopted the practices of the MTV awards shows in an effort to draw in more viewers and “stay hip.” The problem with this idea is that, well, no one watches the MTV awards anymore either (except to re-watch Kanye’s outburst on YouTube). The Oscars opened this year with a dance number by Wolverine, er, Hugh Jackman (which incidentally won an Emmy) and the Emmys opened up with Neil Patrick Harris’ rather enjoyable song “Put Down the Remote” (which I’ll admit was somewhat enjoyable). Neither fits with how seriously these award shows take themselves. There is, after all, a red carpet.
Honestly, how am I supposed to endorse an award show that honors Tina Fey for her work on 30 Rock but also honors Jeff Probst, the host of Survivor? What is his job exactly anyway? His appears to read cue cards and make situations sound more serious than they really are. On the other hand, having the reality category as part of the show allowed me about 20 minutes to watch the new episode of Entourage on my computer.
But most important, I don’t care about behind the scenes. John Stewart: It’s cool that you let one of your writers accept the award on behalf of your show. I get it, you’re a nice guy. But, I don’t care about HIS wife and kids. You’re a star. HE’s (just?) a writer And honestly, HIS talents would be better used rewriting the stale jokes given to the presenters at the Emmys.
4 out of 10 gold statues that no one cares about anymore.
- Becca Russell-Einhorn
The CW brings a surprising amount of emotional depth to a played-out genre.
The Vampire Diaries
The CW
Premiere: Sept. 10, 2009
Not long ago, MSNBC declared that werewolves are the next big thing, citing the upcoming Wolfman movie and the impending MTV remake of Teen Wolf as evidence that “vampires are so 2009.” Well, apparently someone forgot to alert the CW, which placed much of its hopes and dreams for fall rating success on the sexy, sexy, shoulders of The Vampire Diaries, an hour-long drama based on the young adult fiction series of the same name. The show, which can best be described as One Tree Hill minus basketball plus Twilight, could have been dismal; admittedly, when one of my friends told me she was stoked about it, I was wary of further straining my relationship with my exhausted DVR by exposing it to such nonsense. But then I remembered: I TiVo America’s Next Top Model. I don’t have standards!
Although I was expecting something with about as much emotional depth as an episode of The Hills, Diaries was a pleasant surprise. The story, which centers on a young (looking) vampire who returns to his hometown and falls for a local girl who bares an eerie resemblance to his long-dead soul mate, has more than enough angst, blood-sucking, and sharp dialogue to sustain itself over the course of an hour. And, if those reasons weren’t enough of a reason to tune in, HOLY CRAP the cast is ridiculously good looking. I mean, seriously, look at this. Come on! Although the dialogue does veer towards hokey at times—and, as is the case with many teen dramas, there is a serious lack of diversity in vampireville—those sick of Sookie, Bill, Bella, and Edward will find Diaries to be a bloody good alternative.
7 out of 10 vampires who apparently shop at Urban Outfitters.
-Katie Andriulli
So I hear Twilight is about abstinence or something.
Twilight
American Women Writers
Princeton University
Assigned: Fall semester 2009
I’m pretty sure none of my friends believed me last week when I said that I was finally reading Stephenie Meyer’s (now infamous) novel Twilight. And I’m sure they totally did not buy that I was only reading it because it was assigned reading on the syllabus of my upper-division English class on "American Women Writers." But I was, and it is, and now, after having read seemingly every snarky review published of a book I’ve condemned repeatedly on hearsay, I’ve finally read the book itself.
My reading experience was probably different from that of the millions of young women who have read Twilight before me: I was focused on looking for ways that the novel ties into this week’s class topic of "the female gothic." To take a minor example, the protagonist, Bella, shows up in a mysterious out-of-the-way small town, and we see a modern-day echo of the arrival at a mysterious country house that dominated the beginnings of 19th-century gothic fiction. But we also see something very key that my professor was talking about on Tuesday: When it was only considered acceptable for women to read and write certain genres which were seen as less "literary," gothic fiction took center stage. The following that has formed around Twilight is once again establishing that the female gothic—vampires and all—is women’s space.
But my professor also asked us to consider whether it’s still necessary for the university English department to offer a course on American women writers, when female authors are now integrated into the larger departmental curriculum in a way that they weren’t 30 or 40 years ago. If we’re going to consider that, we also have to consider what Stephenie Meyer’s place is in modern fiction. I must consider if the 21st-century zeitgeist is the right place for a writer whose protagonist’s primary motivation is the attention of a man. I must also consider why we need to define women’s fiction, and if it’s necessary to define it in those particularly gender-essentialist terms.
I look forward to what my professor has to say on the subject.
6 out of 10 instances of polymorphous perversity.
-Emily Rutherford
Becca Russell-Einhorn is a former intern with Campus Progress and a senior at Pomona College. Katie Andriulli is communications manager for Campus Progress. Emily Rutherford is a staff writer for Campus Progress.
Social Bookmarking
--------
Comments
!
