Post-finale linkspam

[jae]

First up, it's the beginning of awards season, and the future looks bright:

• The Television Critics Association (TCA) has nominated Matthew Rhys (Philip) for Individual Achievement in Drama and the show for Outstanding Achievement in Drama.

• The show has also received several Critics' Choice Awards nominations: for Best Drama Series, Matthew Rhys for Best Actor in a Drama Series, Keri Russell (Elizabeth) for Best Actress in a Drama Series, and Annet Mahendru (Nina) for Best Supporting Actress in a Drama Series.

• GoldDerby, which is in the business of predicting who's going to win various show business awards, warns that The Americans could ambush the Emmys as well, while Boston Globe columnist Matthew Gilbert includes the show on a list of shows that Emmy voters should make sure to "show some love" to.

• The UK's TV Choice Magazine is also holding its own web-based awards, with The Americans nominated as "Best International Series" (feel free to vote yourself, if you want).

And in other show-related news:

As predicted, The Americans was at the top of the Hollywood Reporter's "power rankings" in its last week of contention.

Rolling Stone featured the show on its list of eight TV shows you should be watching right now.

Flavorwire talked about the show in its summary of the week's top five TV moments.

Elizabeth and Philip made it to #11 on tvline's list of favourite television pairings.

Starpulse made a list of their top five favourite wigs that Keri Russell wore in season two.

IGN's "Channel Surfing" podcast featured the finales of The Americans and Hannibal.

Speaking of those two shows, here's a Salon piece that argues that The Americans and Hannibal are the two best love stories on television.

The blogger behind "Based on Nothing" wrote that the second season of The Americans made it FX's best show.

...and if you're after an oddly refreshing change from all of this praise from critics, here's your outlier--the guy who liked season one but disliked season two.

Comments

[treonb]

On the last link - I don't think Larrick was underused, I think he was misused and overused. Larrick wasn't really a villain, he was only a villain from the KGB's pov. If Stan would have played the same role - going rogue to get his own justice, nobody would have pegged him as the 'bad guy'. In the case of Larrick it was even worse, because he became a villain only because the KGB decided he was one.

So the show had a guy who wasn't exactly bad, but that we were supposed to think was evil incarnate, driving the plot. It's a problematic premise to begin with because (a) you're misleading the audience, who's meanwhile developing expectations and (b) because much of the action is driven by the wrong reaction on the KGB side.

[jae]

I don't know, I never felt like we were supposed to think he was evil incarnate, only that the KGB (and particularly Elizabeth) thought he was that. I certainly never saw him that way. I do wish we'd gotten to know him better, though.

-J

[treonb]

'Evil incarnate' was probably overstating the matter :-) But I think we were supposed to see him as the villain, and that was the issue (or one of the issues) this reviewer was responding to.

ETA: I'll rephrase that. Forget what we were supposed to think. I think most people saw him as the villain. He was cold and ruthless and easy to believe he killed off an entire family. He was shown to have good reasons, but he was never shown to be a good human being.

[theplatonicnonyeah]

The show won for Outstanding Drama at the TCAs yesterday! Should we do a separate post for that? :-D

[jae]

Yay! Such good news.

This happened while I was busy with a parental visit, so I just couldn't make the time. I've got a bunch of links about it, though (as well as about a bunch of other things), so I'll make a post about it in the next couple of days as I dig myself out from under everything I've let slide...

-J

[theplatonicnonyeah]

But where are your priorities! ;-)