Though recognition from awards shows has pretty much become a joke in recent years (OMG a Teen Choice Award!), it's still nice to see a deserving program take home a trophy. Especially when that program is Battlestar Galactica.
The Television Critics Association Awards, which took place this past weekend and are exactly what they sound like, honored Battlestar with their highest honor, "program of the year." The SyFy show has always been a critical favorite, but for some reason never got any real love from the Golden Globes or Emmy Awards (it won a few technical awards for effects at the Emmys).
A splendid remake of the campy late-1970s program, Battlestar Galactica has repeatedly been called one of the best dramas on TV by prominent professional television critics (not just bloggers working out of their basements). That praise, however, didn't translate to awards. Let's face it, there's a clear bias against sci-fi at the Golden Globes and Emmys, as evidenced by a grand total of ZERO major category nominations during the show's five-season run. At least the TCA award gave it a proper sendoff in its final season, even though many would argue it wasn't even its best.
True Blood -- also an Emmy shutout (perhaps there's also a vampire bias?) -- was awarded outstanding new program, one of three wins for HBO. The cable network also won awards for news special The Alzheimer's Project and mini-series Grey Gardens.
Mad Men continued its dominance of the drama category (a given regardless of awards show), and The Big Bang Theory took home the hardware in the comedy category. The unisex acting awards went to Bryan Cranston for Breaking Bad and Jim Parsons for The Big Bang Theory.
Hmmmm... Battlestar Galactica, True Blood, and Big Bang Theory all winners at the TCAs, but not even nominated for Emmys. Who do you agree with -- the critics or the Emmy voters?