The Raúl E. Esparza "Spread the Love" Thread, Part Four — Page 38

That doesn't make sense. Many shows aired on PBS have won Emmys. Sesame Street has won hundreds of Emmys against network television shows, and I can assure you that Sesame Streets watchers are not Emmy voters or even Emmy viewers.

---

I'm aware of that. But Sesame Street has about as much weight and pull in the television industry as the Tonys. It's not the TV business insiders or ad revenue or ratings that won it Emmys; it won because it deserved them. Raul didn't even win a Tony for Company, but people think he deserved an Emmy nomination (in a medium it wasn't created for and shoddily translated to) to the point where they cry conspiracy over the snub? I loved his performance in Company, but to believe it compared to Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and David Letterman- performances that were made for TV- is just ridiculous, fangirlish bias.

---

Updated On: 7/17/08 at 11:11 PM

Who said anything about conspiracy? My point is merely that the Letterman, Colbert and Stewart types have made their respective names (and millions) through TV exposure, not Broadway, so it makes sense that the television industry reward their regular appearances and business leverage (which Sesame Street also had/has, even though it was produced by a not for profit and shown on public stations). And I see nothing fangirlish about personally preferring a quality Broadway production to David Letterman dreck. That's the very reason why I spend time and money on theater and not TV.

Sorry, em - I don't mean to suggest that money is the only driver here (although I just finished reading Speed-the-Plow, so maybe that has influenced my thinking!). I, too, think Colbert and Stewart *are* celever and entertaining (and Letterman is dreck) but all three of them have gained their recognition through TV and appear regularly and bring in viewers. So it doesn't surprise me they are recognized - they are the franchises that have revitalized television and caught the younger demographic that TV needs. Much harder for a single program to have the industry impact of an ongoing series, even if the program is artistic.

And I see nothing fangirlish about personally preferring a quality Broadway production to David Letterman dreck.

When you whine that David Letterman was nominated in a category he's dominated for 20 years over Raul- who's remotely eligible for the first time- yes, it's fangirlish. I never watch David Letterman, but like it or not, his performance fits with the rules and standards by which Emmy nominees are chosen. Broadway musical theatre performances do not.

Your outlook is that Raul didn't get nominated because he's not a (rich) TV insider. The more likely scenario is that he didn't get nominated because his performance was a shoddy photocopy of his stage performance that doesn't translate well to television and therefore didn't warrant their attention in comparison. Company was not being judged on the same merits as it was for the Tonys. It doesn't mean it's anything less than brilliant in its own medium. This is TV, not theatre. The Colbert Report would probably be absurd if performed on stage and lose 90% of its appeal. It's the same way with Company. Simply airing it on TV- no matter how many camera angles they used- doesn't make it a TV performance. It makes it a glorified bootleg.

---

Updated On: 7/18/08 at 12:09 AM

I never really expected Raul to be nominated - in fact I was surprised that COMPANY got nominated so I wasn't whining. When I whine, you'll know. (Mental image of Violet in August: Osage County doing that high pitched scream of "Where's the beef?" - that's it.)

Updated On: 7/18/08 at 10:18 AM

Heh, again? It sounds new, but I wonder if it's the same one from a few months ago?

---

Seth should have him on the Chatterbox again. It's been like four years!

---

Oh, isn't he performing on Rosie's cruise or something? I think I remember reading that.

---

Raul didn't even win a Tony for Company, but people think he deserved an Emmy nomination (in a medium it wasn't created for and shoddily translated to) to the point where they cry conspiracy over the snub?

I have to disagree with this. While it might not have captured the intensity of seeing Company and Raul's performance in the theater (and maybe nothing could), I thought the Great Performances broadcast was a stellar translation of the show to film -- hence the awards it did earn. It works leagues better than, say, Legally Blonde, which seems made to be filmed by comparison, and I liked it more than Lincoln Center's Light in the Piazza broadcast. For such an unusually staged piece, I was surprised how well it translated, and Raul's performance came across very well. An Emmy nomination for him would have been very, very surprising, but not totally unwarranted (I mean, didn't Barry Manilow beat out Stephen Colbert a few years back for a special of some sort?).

Updated On: 7/18/08 at 02:50 PM

Yeah, Barry Manilow won for Outstanding Individual Performance in a Variety or Music Program. And that was for a concert that aired on PBS as well. Raul's performance wasn't ineligible for award consideration, but the performance he gave isn't the performance Emmy nominators are looking for. It was a good translation of film, but the acting is still different genres. Company (while better than Legally Blonde) was still stage acting. Remember everyone's reactions here when people said Raul was over the top and overacting during Being Alive at the Tonys? It comes across differently when you see it onstage than it does on a TV screen, and that backlash was among fans on a theatre message board who are used to theatre performances. Even though the Company performance was better than the Tonys, his performance came would across poorly to someone that wasn't accounting for the different between stage and screen performance. Barry Manilow didn't screech bloody murder to echo off the mezzanine wall to get his emotion across.

---

Fair enough about the difference in perspectives for theater vs. non-theater people, skittles.

Updated On: 1/24/09 at 07:37 PM