Awards Tracker

All things Oscars, Emmys, Grammys and Tonys

« Previous Post | Awards Tracker Home | Next Post »

Emmys: Should Jon Cryer move up to the lead comedy actor race for 'Two and a Half Men'?

Jon Cryer Two and a half Men EmmyAfter reading my recent riff on the question of whether "Glee" star Chris Colfer should jump up to the lead Emmy race from the supporting comedy actor competition, our forums moderator, Matt Noble, pondered another possible category switcheroo.

Should Jon Cryer ("Two and a Half Men") -- who won best supporting comedy actor two years ago -- move up? There's a lot of room in the lead-actor category. Only three contenders look like shoo-ins for a nomination: Steve Carell (who's never won for "The Office"), Alec Baldwin (won twice for "30 Rock") and last year's champ Jim Parsons ("The Big Bang Theory"). Matt Noble sends us his thoughts below:

With three open slots in the lead actor race, it seems like it could be a category worth competing in. There is talk that Chris Colfer and Ed O'Neill should perhaps take advantage of the field and promote themselves. However, it seems like the best person to step up to the plate is actually Jon Cryer from "Two and a Half Men."

Firstly, Cryer has always had a prominent role in the series. The argument has been made every year that, as one of the show's "two men," he was entitled to the lead category.

He has already won once in supporting and likely wouldn't be able to beat the tough field there to win again. His chance of winning lead actor is also minimal, but he has little to lose by going up.

Charlie Sheen's public self-destruction makes this a smart move. Sheen has been nominated three times before, but missed out last year. Now voters aren't going to flock to him after his meltdown. With all the "Two and a Half Men" drama over the past year, Jon Cryer can be the person the academy can rally 'round. Giving Cryer a nom over Sheen is a way out of the current fiasco –- it acknowledges "Two and a Half Men" in a top category without rewarding Sheen.

It would also work well for CBS, which may be trying to promote the show next year without Sheen.

It seems like a move up would mean that Cryer, the Academy and CBS could all end up "winning" even if all Cryer gets is a nomination.


Is Chris Colfer really a lead actor on 'Glee'?

Emmy inside track: The race for TV drama actor

-- Tom O'Neil

Photo: Jon Cryer with his Emmy in 2009. Credit: Lawrence K. Ho / Los Angeles Times

Comments () | Archives (4)

The comments to this entry are closed.

I enjoy Jon Cryer's performances and think its a great idea of him moving up to enter as "Leading Actor".

G'Day fan de Patti Smith,
I never insinuated that this should be done to "punish" Charlie Sheen. My motivation for the move is as follows:
1. Cryer is arguably a lead (I think he even submitted himself as such for the first season or two of the series)

2. He's already won in supporting so has less to lose going up

3. The Charlie Sheen news could make voters (rightly or wrongly) less likely to want to reward Sheen. Right or wrong, if true, this would be the case regardless of Cryer's category placement. However, being someone with his hands relatively clean from the saga, Cryer may be in a better position to get nominated in lead than his co-star this year so the promotion could be worth it.

4. It would help CBS to start to promote the show without Sheen, putting in people's minds the idea of Cryer as a lead of the show.

Both Cryer and Sheen should have long since been co-nominees in this category. The title of the show is TWO and a Half Men....not the Sheen Show. Granted, the lead role worked in his benefit to score a Supporting Actor Emmy.

That having been said, bumping up Cryer makes perfect sense -- particularly in re-establishing Cryer as a viable lead for the new season of the show. Sheen's off-screen antics should have no bearing on either of their chances at a nomination or a win.

So nominating Jon Cryer as a lead is a way to "punish" Charlie Sheen..pathetic motivation LA Times shame on you.
By the way love him, hate him this sitcom was based on Charlie Sheen's character and this show was greenlighted only because of the name "Charlie Sheen" and don't get me wrong i don't give any opinion here on Charlie Sheen the actor and public persona but just establish the facts.
p.s: Jon Cryer is a good comedic actor but your motivation is pitiful and the worse : the Academy is capable to do that..sigh..


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...

Stay Connected:

Recent Posts