Re: General Glee Discussion Thread--Part 4

[fantastica]

she looks so skinny!

[Buenos]

Wonder if it's just going to be Lea and Jane at the Emmy awards for the Finn special tribute as far as Glee cast.

[fantastica]

probably both

[Glorfindel]

And the protests just became more personal:

Adam Klugman took exception to the inclusion of Monteith over his father.
"He was a kid who had won no Emmys," said Klugman.

The Hollwood Reporter


TBH: I don't blame the relatives of those actors wo are not singled out (like Jack Klugman and Larry Hagman) for being miffed by this.

They should not have singled out anybody, as it only leads to other people feeling left out and offended. And really: a memorial segment to honor the recently deceased should not be something to bicker about.
As an old saying goes: "We are all equal in death."

[fantastica]

either way, cory will never know. he's gone. but this left a bad bruise on a lot of parties affected.

[Buenos]

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/209521/emmy-flub-larry-hagman-of-all-people-excluded.html#axzz2eiW95Fnp

I will maintain that the decision to pay special tribute to the late “Glee” actor Cory Monteith is potentially offensive on a number of levels, especially in light of the fact that room was made for him rather than Hagman. (Again, a personal aside: In recent years I enjoyed private conversations with Monteith at two industry events and he struck me as one of the nicest and most down-to-earth individuals I have ever met in Hollywood.)

Monteith was a talented young actor and musical performer, but simply starring in a television series for four years hardly qualifies anyone for special treatment of the kind he is receiving from the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, especially when someone like Hagman (or multiple Emmy winner Jack Klugman) isn’t similarly recognized. My issue here is certainly not with him. Monteith may not deserve a special honor at the Emmys, but he also doesn’t deserve to be at the center of a manufactured debate of this kind. The whole situation smacks of somebody (or some number of people) taking advantage of a terrible loss in a desperate effort to attract the young audience that doesn’t give a hoot about the Emmy Awards (or most other awards shows) at the expense of honoring one of those rare individuals who should receive a memorable farewell from the business he helped make great.

[Buenos]

Editorial in Variety:

Does Cory Monteith Deserve A Special Emmy Memorial? (Opinion)

http://variety.com/2013/tv/news/cory-monteith-emmy-awards-tribute-1200613759/

Does a distinctive role on a TV show does automatically merit the kind of memorial Monteith is getting here? You could argue that Gandolfini is in essentially the same category, but that only brings the difference between Monteith and someone of Gandolfini’s caliber into sharper relief. What Gandolfini did on “The Sopranos” inarguably transformed the medium of television; can we really say the same about Monteith on “Glee?”

By putting Monteith in this elite group, the Academy is risking having its honorable intentions misconstrued as using the actor’s memory to cater to the younger audiences that are in decreasingly short supply for award shows these days. The Emmy Awards is a business that requires generating TV ratings to maximize advertising dollars, but that needs to be balanced with the need for the Academy to maintain appropriate perspective in recognizing excellence and influence in television.

Then there is delicate matter of considering how elevating Monteith has an impact on the perception of both the other actors who he is being grouped alongside as well as the dozens of others who are being relegated to the standard In Memoriam tribute. Monteith could have gone on to a tremendous career, but Larry Hagman, for instance, already
had a tremendous career, and putting Monteith on a pedestal casts a shadow over the memory of this iconic “Dallas” star.

Questioning Monteith’s place in this special memorial cuts to the heart of what the Emmys are all about. If the event’s primary function is to give a sense of the emotional state of the audience at a given time, then Monteith certainly belongs where the Academy has put him.

But the Emmys should be held to a higher standard. The event should be first and foremost about recognizing a body of work. In that respect, the Emmys needs to aspire to timelessness, demonstrating its relevancy whether being watched on the night of the telecast or 20 years later. The way to ensure it resonates both now and in the future is to stick to the accomplishments of the talent or the production.

It’s about what has been achieved — not what could have been.

[valkeakuulas]

This is raising a big hubbub, isn't it?

I always thought award shows did these memoriam things with a slide shows, or those are the only ones I've seen. Sometimes a posthumous award gets it's own section in these shows.

I don't even understand why Gandolfini would get one either, if that is still the case. Well the Emmys are tomorriw so too late to change anything anymore.

[Jellyrolls]

The shows always do the in memorium things, and it would be totally appropriate to have his picture in that. This year they are singling out some actors for extra recognition as part of the show, something that they don't typically do (or maybe they'll do it for one person or soemthing). The reason why it was bothering people is because Cory is being singled out when there are other actors who are more well known, have actually won emmys, and are more beloved who have died this past year who aren't getting extra recognition.

[Georgette888]

They just want to get more 18-30 yr olds (otherwise known as the important demo) watching the Emmys, lbr. I wish they'd just let Cory rest in peace now. This furore is sad and distressing.

[Buenos]

It's just getting sadder.

http://www.tmz.com/2013/09/22/cory-monteiths-mom-emmy-adam-klugman-jack-memoriam-tribute/

Cory Monteith's mom thinks Jack Klugman's son has it all wrong -- because Cory could have been the next Jack Klugman had he lived.

Ann McGregor thinks Adam Klugman is being unfair, telling TMZ her son is absolutely worthy of getting a special in memoriam honor at tonight's Emmy Awards ... even though Jack isn't getting one.

Ann tells us she believes you cannot judge worthiness by a person's age because her son was on a path of greatness -- not only with his acting and singing abilities ... but with the charitable he work he did.

Ann tells us, "If he had lived 30 more years he would have accomplished much more."

[fantastica]

while i understand the intense love of a mother, i wish she didn't speak out and get herself involved in this toxic battle that nobody can win. cory is gone. nothing can bring him back, tribute or no tribute.

[Georgette888]

Knowing TMZ, I wouldn't put it past them to doorstep / contact her. They are pretty foul.

[Glorfindel]

It's just sad and awkward at this point, with the grieving living argueing about the value or potential value (had they lived longer) of the dead.


The Emmy's really put their foot in it.

[Ranwing]

This whole thing has been handled so badly. I feel horrible for Cory's mother. She lost her son and I fully understand that she believes that he could have been one of those major stars had he lived to continue his career. Certainly the loss of that kind of potential should be mourned. But I agree with a lot of the critics that to give him a special tribute is unseemly given his relatively limited body of work. And the matter is only complicated by the means that Cory died - had he not died from an overdose, I don't think there would be quite this level of controversy.

I'm just so tied of Cory's death being used for ratings. And realistically, how many Glee fans are going to sit through the Emmys just to see a two minute tribute?

[Jellyrolls]

Just an FYI, I moved the discussion of Jane's tribute to Cory to the Remembering Cory thread. I'm going to leave the discussion of the controversy here (because I don't have the time to weed through it).

[Lottie2303]

I just read on Reddit a thread "The moment you stopped watching a TV-show". glee was named quite a few times, but I was sincerely shocked how many singled out Kurt in a negative light   

[valkeakuulas]

I just read on Reddit a thread "The moment you stopped watching a TV-show". glee was named quite a few times, but I was sincerely shocked how many singled out Kurt in a negative light   

What you mean as Kurt being the reason people have seized watching?

[Lottie2303]

I just read on Reddit a thread "The moment you stopped watching a TV-show". glee was named quite a few times, but I was sincerely shocked how many singled out Kurt in a negative light   

What you mean as Kurt being the reason people have seized watching?

Some of them, yes.

[ChrisColferFan1]

I plan on  not watching no more, if I do end up not watching it won't be because of Kurt, but  because of Blaine and Tina and Sam. If I do end up watching it will only be for Kurt.

[Jellyrolls]

I just read on Reddit a thread "The moment you stopped watching a TV-show". glee was named quite a few times, but I was sincerely shocked how many singled out Kurt in a negative light   

I'm not completely surprised that some people would single out Kurt in a negative light. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of people in this country who are homophobic. I also get why people would be sick of Kurt because of his voice.

However, I don't know how anyone can be sick of Kurt after season 4 when he had so little.

[valkeakuulas]

I just read on Reddit a thread "The moment you stopped watching a TV-show". glee was named quite a few times, but I was sincerely shocked how many singled out Kurt in a negative light   

I'm not completely surprised that some people would single out Kurt in a negative light. Unfortunately, there are still a lot of people in this country who are homophobic. I also get why people would be sick of Kurt because of his voice.

However, I don't know how anyone can be sick of Kurt after season 4 when he had so little.

That is baffling me too. I guess it might be because Kurt IS one of the main faces, one of the most recognisable, of Glee and the the general downfall of the show in the grapevine gets put together in somebodys head. I don't know. I think it's just my fear for Chris' career that makes me hate that option.

[ChrisColferFan1]

If anyone should be single out in a negative light it should be Blaine or even Tina or same. Not Kurt.

[Lottie2303]

^ They were a few gay people actually who didn't feel properly represented because of Kurt as he is too gay. But to be fair, I sometimes got the feeling they confused Kurt's storyline with Rachel or Blaine. My favorite comment, Kurt gets everything and never loses (yes, they really were talking about Kurt). I got the impression they wanted to hate him just for the sake of it. Also some Blarren fans who were pissed thst Blaine only exists to worship Kurt (which is partly true but still is done with dubious storylines).

[sheny]

^ They were a few gay people actually who didn't feel properly represented because of Kurt as he is too gay. But to be fair, I sometimes got the feeling they confused Kurt's storyline with Rachel or Blaine. My favorite comment, Kurt gets everything and never loses (yes, they really were talking about Kurt). I got the impression they wanted to hate him just for the sake of it. Also some Blarren fans who were pissed thst Blaine only exists to worship Kurt (which is partly true but still is done with dubious storylines).

What? They probably meant Kurt NEVER gets anything and ALWAYS loses. Are we and those people watching the same show? 

[Sponsored content]