OCR Text |
Show Mm By LYN CONNELLY "pHE Emmy Awards are past history but their memory lingers lin-gers on In some respects . . . There were several questionable awards given out which indicate the television tele-vision industry really doesn't take itself too seriously , . . For example, ex-ample, Nanette Fabray is a charming, charm-ing, beautiful and wonderfully talented tal-ented young lady and her Emmy as best supporting actress was deserved (although we would have given the edge to Audrey Meadows), but why she was considered con-sidered to be the best comedienne only heaven and the balloteers know. Granted, she Is good but she Is no Grade Allen or Lucille Ball . . . It was apparent she won out of pure sentiment, which surely isn't fair to those with the merit . . . In this respect, the movie industry indus-try has it over television . . . Lant year, had the movie folk voted by sentiment rather than common sense, Judy Garland and not Grace Kelly would have won the Oscar for 1954 . . . Everyone hoped Judy, beloved In Hollywood, would win, but they felt duty-bound to vote tor Miss Kelly who had actually turned In the best performance per-formance . . . Needless to say, this is as it should be. Another award we found it hard to understand was NBC's Matinee Theatre winning the top spot as best daytime show . . . Obviously those voting never watch daytime television and just assumed a play must be better than anything live could be . . . This snobbish attitude that only night shows are good is not borne out by some of the trash - seen In the evening hours. To completely Ignore Garry Moore, Bob Crosby and Dave Gar-roway, Gar-roway, who consistently have top entertainment (and this is difficult since they must perform daily rather than weekly as the top-notch top-notch stars do) is inconceivable . . . Surely it must be discouraging to the fellows who give their all to the medium. |