Emmy's biggest snub: How the heck did 'Lost' get lost?
Recently, the TV academy overhauled Emmy voting just to make sure "Lost" got nominated for best drama series. But it still got snubbed — just like last year, after having won the top prize in 2005. Last year's slap was actually self-administered: Its producers submitted a sample episode that didn't make sense to judges who weren't regular viewers of a serialized drama full of dangling plot lines and irritating ghosts who flit in and out of the series, befuddling even diehard fans.
But this year Emmy chiefs decided to reduce the input of judges by 50 percent after they viewed a sample episode. If judges still gave "Lost" a low score, ATAS chiefs figured it could be offset by being mixed on a 50/50 basis with the results of the original popular vote of academy members, which determined the Top 10 finalists. (Yes, just like you see on "Dancing with the Stars"!) "Lost" is such a Nielsen hit that, surely, Emmy chiefs figured, it probably scored high in the pop vote, right? Or no?
So what happened? Did another poor episode choice sink "Lost"? And, if so, was "Lost" just not ranked high enough in the pop vote to be saved? Or did "Lost" rank so low in the pop vote that there was no hope for a nomination, even if judges adored its episode sample?
Initially, "Lost" producers planned to submit "The Man from Tallahassee," which has a self-contained plot. But then they switched to the season finale. The reason: It was twice as long. Usually, double-length episodes triumph, so it was an interesting gamble to take.
But most of our forum posters believe it was a bad Emmy strategy. A few actual judges we spoke to liked the episode submission a lot, but they were all were regular viewers of the series, so they understood the oft-mysterious goings-on.
"It certainly wasn't the popular vote that killed 'Lost,'" insists our forums poster "MissyGal." I'm assuming it ranked pretty high on the popular ballot. It had to have been the episode."
"I never thought the season finale was a good episode for 'Lost,'" says "StlLawStudent." "The flashback/flashforwards don't make a heck of a lot of sense until the end and only then it is satisfying if you are a regular viewer."
"Clearly, what 'Lost' needs to do is write an episode about Hurricane Katrina, then they'll get in," says "BuffyMars."
Read more reax in our forums — CLICK HERE!
(Photo: ABC)
Last year ABC was so pissed off that Lost wasn't nominated that they counterprogrammed the Emmys with Pirates of the Caribbean. Wonder what they will do this year?
Posted by: A.C. | July 26, 2007 at 02:18 PM
I just want to say is that if you watch every episode of LOST and pay attention, it's really not confusing. Certainly no more confusing than any other piece of low fantasy science-fiction. I think it's rather foolish for anyone to skip episodes, then complain that it doesn't make sense. This isn't CSI. You need to watch every episode.
But that said, I can understand why it was snubbed. The judges probably don't "get" this type of show. It's somewhat esoteric. It's made with a specific target audience in mind. It's not accessible to everyone. It's hard to judge a show like this.
Plus Season 3 was very hit and miss. There were a few real stinkers this season, and one bad apple may have spoiled the bunch. It's a shame, though. The season finale was probably the best hour of television I've ever seen.
Posted by: Eric | July 26, 2007 at 09:13 AM
I find it hard to believe that Boston Legal was nominated over Lost or Friday Night Lights for Best Drama. It is infuriating and frustrating. In my opinion, the second half of Season 3 of Lost was the best written/produced/acted/directed television in years. At least the Emmy voters got one nomination right - Michael Emerson for Best Supporting Actor in a Drama Series. There has not been a more compelling performance in that category in a long time, and Emerson just nailed it in every way.
Posted by: JOpinionated | July 26, 2007 at 12:03 AM
This past season of LOST was as amazing as the first. I think anyone who was at all disappointed, did not watch every episode this season. But what is there to complain about -- they have already won best drama series -- the sad part is -- that matthew fox, evangelline Lilly and eliabeth mitchell -- who all gave powerful Emmy WINNING performances this year.
Posted by: jake | July 25, 2007 at 11:56 PM
I don't think that the episode submission should be at fault. I still blame the voting system. Serialized shows suffer the most because voters aren't regular viewers, and on the other hand, the system unfairly favors procedural shows with self-contained stories.
Posted by: Jeff | July 25, 2007 at 08:07 PM
I can't believe anyone is worrying about "Lost," which is a mediocre show, when the real snub was "Friday Night Lights," which is a truly brilliant show.
Posted by: goodbuzz | July 25, 2007 at 03:53 PM
Lost has basically.....Lost all of us.
It's..... let us confuse the Bejesus out of everbody snooty attitude, has alienated even the most die-hard fans. It's no wonder it's popularity is way down.
Posted by: RC | July 25, 2007 at 12:28 PM
But then why did the same episode get nominated for Best Direction and Writing? The Emmy process doesn't favor serials. We'll be having this conversation next year when Heroes doesn't get nominated.
Posted by: Seanathan | July 25, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Am I the only one who think Lost was nominated and won for the season in which it should? These last two seasons have been an almost incoherent mess, with sporadic episodes and scenes of past greatness but nowhere near the consistence brilliance of the pilot (which is the episode I believe it won for in 2005).
Posted by: junior | July 25, 2007 at 10:16 AM
BuffyMars is my hero
Posted by: starbucks10172 | July 25, 2007 at 06:50 AM