Comments on: Ingrate or Honorable?

by: Aly

Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:12:13 +0000

She was spot on. She was barely in the season, and her story line sucked. I think that she made a smart and respectful move. If anyone at Grey's is pissed with her it's because they know she is right… or they didn't watch their own show.

by: Jojo

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:54:04 +0000

I think she is an ingrate. Ungrateful little brat. if her material sucked so bad why would she think she would be nominated anyway. If the process had any intergrity she wouldn't have to eliminate her self the owrk would speak for itself. Who does she think she is? Ellen, Rosie, or some other women with 8 or 9 emmy's?

by: Sus

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:09:05 +0000

If she didn't feel she was deserving of the award fine, that was honorable, but I think speaking about it publically made her look more like an attention monger. Yes, her storyline was alittle weak this year, but she had a large storyline in previous seasons. When a show has a large cast it seems as if a difference sub-set of actors are given the limelight one year and not the next. Sandra Oh had a much smaller role this year after her big storyline last year (Burke's hand/the wedding, etc).

by: mb18

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:11:25 +0000

her character (izzie) is not exactly my favorite in grey's anatomy but she is right, her part this season was kinda dry, especially because the season before was almost about her (some of her problems outshone meredith's -the main character of GA)

ps: perez hilton doesn't watch grey's anatomy…. hmm, that just doesn't sound right!

by: Tarsi

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 07:22:37 +0000

I think what Katherine did was honerable. She did not say the writers gave her crap material she said that she did not have the material deserving of an Emmy nomination. Let's face it, Last year she had the very dramatic scenes with her dying lover…. this season she was really a back story. I don't believe the writers would be upset by her comment.
Katherine is very admirable to put her craft over ego… we should applaud that not attack it.

by: Jem

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 06:04:08 +0000

I love her & couldn't agree with her more. Izzie's my favorite on Grey's but this year she just wasn't as intriguing.

And anyone who says she thinks she's "above the Emmy's" is out of their mind. She's the most down-to-earth person ever, she knows what she's doing.

by: Britt

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 03:22:34 +0000

I watch the show… and Katie's character didn't have much to do this season, it's true. But there was a strike… and they were trying to honor what work she DID do. She's being a b*tch! A few hit movies turned her into a diva, and without Grey's, she would STILL be a nobody!!

by: TroyB

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 01:24:27 +0000

A great actress will take shit material and make it their own.

Enough said.

by: sarah

Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:55:40 +0000

well.. yes and no in the beginning it looked like it was gonna be something good between izzy and george and then it just fell apart. this season for the whole cast was pretty shitty. I mean all the drama with washington kinda put an x on the season and then with meredith and derek not hooking up at all was terrible! they really didn't do much with izzy's character, made her second guess herself ALOT which was boring.. She seemed to finally get back in to the swing of things the last two episodes of the season when she was helping alex out. Hopefully next season will be alot better. So no i don't think she was in the wrong for declining the award, and I guess you could call it honorable!!!

by: Twist

Sat, 14 Jun 2008 15:00:52 +0000

Silly actress; you were nominated for your ACTING skills, not your WRITING skills. The question is, how well did you do with the material you were given? If Dame Judi can be nominated for an Oscar based on 7 minutes of screen time, you can be nominated for an entire season's worth of work.

Her intentions may be good. (*Cough*) However, her logic sucks.