| March
2001 |
A Perfectly Serious and Straightforward Glance at the Emmys
Craig
Thurs., Mar. 15, 2001 20:56
The 2001 Emmy nominations have been announced, and, to be perfectly candid, things look grim for our good friends at Warner Bros. It appears that, contrary to popular belief, the academy members do actually have some taste, as very few Kids' WB! programs received any nominations at all. Notes ToonZone co-founder and all-around nice guy Brian Cruz, "For the first time that I can remember, there's no WBA show nominated for best animated children's program." For the record, Mr. Cruz's memory apparently doesn't go back to 1990, which was the last time that no WBA series was nominated for said category (possibly not coincidentally, WBA was not producing any television series at that time).
Of note this year is the nomination of Batman Beyond for Special Class Animated Program, and for Achievement in Musical Direction and Composition. WBA's shows have always been strong competitors in these categories, often with two or three quality programs in the running. This year, they have…well, Batman Beyond.
Other Kids' WB!-related nominations include: Batman Beyond and X-Men Evolution for Achievement in Sound Editing, and Batman Beyond, X-Men Evolution, and Jackie Chan Adventures for the prestigious Achievement in Sound Mixing Award! So, as you can see, while the writing, animation, voice-over, and pretty much every other aspect of WB programs has gone South, the stalwart, hardworking folk in the sound department have remained as strong and dependable as ever! They continue to make the world sit up and take notice, as they make our favorite cartoons sound truly…dare I say it?…good. Hear, hear!
Also of possible interest, Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd Century, which has been airing on some other network for some amount of time, and which will be moving to the WB this fall, was nominated for the Special Class Animated Program award as well. And for the record, the comments made above about the academy having taste were made in jest, and are not intended to be interpreted as anything other than such. | |
