This week, Katherine Heigl once again finds herself in the center of a bit of a controversy because of something she's said about one of her roles. Some folks over at the LA Times' awards blog noticed that Heigl (last year's Emmy champ) wasn't on the list of actresses being considered for this year's awards. In response, she said:
"I did not feel that I was given the material this season to warrant an Emmy nomination and in an effort to maintain the integrity of the academy organization, I withdrew my name from contention. In addition, I did not want to potentially take away an opportunity from an actress who was given such materials."
This has struck many as a major — and inappropriate — slam against the writers of Grey's Anatomy. But does Heigl have a point? In the past, she's had some of the juiciest material the show has ever offered up (hence winning an Emmy). But she spent the fourth season mostly in the background, doing silly things like performing CPR on a deer.
It's an ensemble show, and the writers have to consider the big picture rather than dealing out even storylines to each star all the time (also, the show's not called Izzie's Anatomy). But if Heigl really did get slighted with barely-there material that didn't allow her to do her best work, I guess it would feel strange to be nominated. Do agree with her about Izzie's diminished role?
Photo copyright 2008 ABC, Inc.