Our wireless router died last week and we've yet to replace it. That means that only one of us may connect to the Internet at a time, directly to the cable modem.
It's a pain.
And over the weekend, the direct connection was mostly made by my college freshman nephew, who needed a dose of home life -- not to mention free washing and drying and our HBO. It's a pleasure to have him living so close by now... and beginning next week, when his sister starts her quarter at UCLA, I'll have both of my sister's two oldest kids. It should be fun.
So last night's Emmys telecast -- what did you think?
I have a particular fondness for the Emmys, having attended three times during the 80's, when I was working on the Tonight Show as the writers' assistant.
Note the emphasis on the word "assistant" -- when I tell people what I did back then, they seem not to hear that word and then I find out they think I was a writer for the show. Much as I wish I'd had that job instead, I'm afraid all I ever did was type the jokes, distribute the scripts and perform other miscellaneous comedy-related tasks, like stuffing Carnac envelopes. But I never WROTE for Johnny Carson. I do not possess the kind of mind that can process all the bad news that occurs during the day and turn that into some killer one-liners, which is what I observed his staff of writers do every single day. It takes a very special talent -- and possibly a sick mind -- to be able to do that, and I admire those guys greatly... even if I ended up resenting some of them in the end.
But as usual, I digress -- Let's get back to last night's telecast.
The stage set in the round: Didn't work on screen, and I gather -- from all the complaints and comments from the presenters -- it was disastrous in the Shrine (which is a HUGE venue). I don't think they'll try that again next year.
Ryan Seacrest as host: Eh. I like the guy, but maybe doing the red carpet show AND hosting was TOO MUCH. Please bring back Jon Stewart or Ellen DeGeneres.
Speaking of Jon Stewart -- LOVED seeing the camaraderie between him, Colbert and Daily Show alumnus Steve Carell.
Also love the video montages they use now to announce the writing nominees for comedy/variety shows (the category my friends were always nominated in). Although I was hard pressed to explain the Bill Maher men's bathroom bit to my daughter. (Killer funny but inappropriate for a show where families are watching together).
As for inappropriateness, what was with all the bleeping? Did Sally Field start uttering obscenities, or did Fox pull the plug on her for political reasons? Did those of you on the East Coast (who got to see the show LIVE, unlike those of us who LIVE HERE and HAD TO WAIT THREE HOURS) have to endure the same cutaways to the big electronic globe at the top of the set?
One thing I did like this year was that the awards were spread around a little. OK, "The Sopranos" got best drama -- big surprise, and ended up shutting out some other, really good series -- but at least with them gone, "Heroes" will have a chance next year. And "30 Rock" got best comedy (as one of Tina Fey's "dozens of viewers," I rejoice).
I still think that once an actor wins for a series character, that he or she should be disqualified from being nominated again, if only to give other deserving souls a chance. It's not that I don't think Jeremy Piven is brilliant in "Entourage" -- I was truly angry that he didn't win the first year he was nominated. But he got his recognition last year, and this year, I would have liked to see one of the others in his category get it. Kevin Dillon (also brilliant in the same show), Neil Patrick Harris (hysterical on "How I Met Your Mother"), Rainn Wilson (what would "The Office" be without Dwight?) and Jon Cryer (all right, "Two and a Half Men" sucks, but Cryer is always good) all deserve a chance. But Emmy voters get stuck in a rut and seem to like to vote for the familiar. How else to explain "Boston Legal"'s James Spader winning Best Actor in a Drama over Hugh Laurie's "House"?
But it's all Monday morning quarterbacking in the end. When you are judging a body of work as varied as the best programming of the last season, how do you say that Sally Field was better than Kyra Sedgwick or Edie Falco? It may be a cliche, but it truly is an honor just to be nominated. Rather than single out one entry in a field of excellence, how would it play to recognize all the nominees for their achievements? No one would have to practice a "loser face" for the cameras. No lame presenters. Just the television industry applauding their best work.
Of course, I know that will never happen, because Americans like to win and they like to crown winners. But I can dream.
I am still doing the weight loss thing and have found an interesting tool to keep me from straying at night. Check out the latest post on my Socal Stuff review blog.
Recent Comments