The Emmy Awards show review: Jane Lynch, 'Modern Family,' 'Downton Abbey,' and some genuine surprises

It’s rare that an awards show both rewards the people who really deserve those awards and is itself a rewarding show. But this year’s Emmy Awards was both. Led by spunky, clever host Jane Lynch, the Emmys were delightfully surprising — Margo Martindale! Kyle Chandler! Melissa McCarthy plus all the other Best Comedy Actress nominees onstage together! — and, in most ways, quite satisfactory.

You can’t argue too much with an Emmys that rewarded Friday Night Lights and Justified. Oh, sure Mike and Molly isn’t one-eighth as good a sitcom as Parks and Recreation, but who can really begrudge Melissa McCarthy her happiness, her TV past (Gilmore Girls), and her film future (after Bridesmaids)?

Lynch was excellent, and even better in her quick, throwaway moments than in the funny taped pieces. The way she came out of the montage for reality shows by saying, “I had the smallest aneurism during that clip,” or the way she shimmied her chest at the camera before a commercial break did as much to add amusement to the proceedings as anything else.

As for the awards themselves, the happy surprises were led by Kyle Chandler and Margo Martindale’s wins. I rather cynically did not think Emmy voters would really take in what a great job Martindale did in Justified, and doubted they would ever recognize Chandler’s sustained FNL skills. (If only Connie Britton had been a surprise winner as well.) And if the Modern Family comedy sweep wasn’t exactly a shocker, it was nonetheless terrific that Julie Bowen won.

The single biggest surprise may have been Barry Pepper’s win for his performance in The Kennedys, a much-maligned miniseries. Pepper wasn’t present to accept his award for playing Bobby Kennedy, which was too bad; he probably would have been more animated than his Kennedys co-star, Katie Holmes, was as a presenter.

Trends? Well, it looks as though Boardwalk Empire may not be the Emmy machine HBO might have hoped it would become. And although Mad Men repeated its win for Best Drama, it was shut out in the major acting categories — this, in a year when Breaking Bad wasn’t even in contention.

And by the time the sequel to Downton Abbey reaches these shores, PBS will probably end up with the biggest hit it’s had since Ken Burns’ The Civil War.

Oh, and I did terribly (nine out of 24 categories) in my Emmy winner predictions. I’ll berate myself in another post, here.

Twitter: @kentucker
For more:

Predicting the Emmys: I shoulda gone with my heart…

Emmys 2011: The complete winners list

Comments (232 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2 3 8
  • Tcrab

    Can Katie Holmes just go away? Her wooden delivery and lop sided mouth should just be playing housewife to Tom Cruise, not presenting on an award show. She’s never done anything remotely decent and will only do so when she fades into the distance like her vacant stare. Other than that, I enjoyed the show this year for a change.

    • Steve ftw

      it is pretty sad that with all that comic talent on stage the biggest laugh of the night came from producer/writer Steve Levitan’s wife with one look!..other then that it was a snore fest, the other Steve (Carell) was robbed!

      • ten

        ONE OF THE WORST EMMY SHOWS EVER!

      • inga

        they should give the Levitan’s their own show, ala “Curb Your Enthusiasm” they upstaged miost of the real actors on the telecast!

      • Ann

        This production was really really bad. It reminded me of a really bad MTV prod without any of the signature shockers. What were they thinking?

      • KC

        Maybe now people will finally realize how UNtalented Jane Lynch really is.

      • @Ten

        Completely agree. Awful awful show. I couldn’t even make it through to the end. Snooze fest. I knew we were in trouble from the opening song.

      • Blair

        I thought it was just me being grumpy! Turned the program off after about 45 minutes. Thought the attempted humor was really lame.

      • james

        I am a mature and air force man. i just think here is a good place to meet friends. i just wonder if i can meet a sweet girl there, because i wanna have a long relationship..i uploaded my hot photos on —-[millionaireluv__c'o'm ]—-under the name manuel2011 , maybe you want to check out my photos firstly!

      • quan

        I am a 35 years old CEO, rich and strong.but still single … now I am
        seeking a good woman who can give me real love , so i got a username Hotlove2011 on–Wealthybar.C óM— .it is the first and best club for
        wealthy people and their admirers. e…you don’t have to be rich ,but you can meet one there ,maybe you wanna check it out or tell your friends !

      • elr

        I totlly agree! I couln’t even make it through the opening sequence before I knew it was going to be bad. I kept flipping back and forth between a movie I was watching and every time I did there was another song or comedy bit happening. Worst telecast I’ve ever seen and Jane Lynch was the worst.

      • JB

        I completely agree that it was one of the worst shows ever. I HATE football and even I turned to that rather than watch that crap!! Jane Lynch is not funny, nor can she act. Get that ugly broad off the TV!!!

    • LOL

      America loves Crap

      • Lola

        I know I’m feeding the troll but… Kyle Chandler is far from crap. Big Bang Theory, maybe. Katie Holmes, definately. But Kyle Chandler? No way. Let’s be a little more specific with our criticism, shall we?

      • LOL

        ok to be specific the show, the ceromony, and Jane Lynch as host were all Crap!

      • ha

        “Her name was Lola, she was a “Ho” Girl”…..get off Chandler’s Junk!

    • lap

      I’ll forever like julianna margulies a little less because she ROBBED Connie Britton

      • ?

        whatever!….she actually was one of the funnier presenters of the night with her deadpan delivery when she presented the best supporting actor Comedy Award!

      • Ethan

        Boohoo. Connie Britton didn’t deserve it. She didn’t really do much in the finale.

      • Aiden

        It would have been a perfect night, yes, if Connie Britton had won. But honestly, Julianna Margulies is a sensational actress who deserved that trophy, no doubt. If anything, a tie would’ve been justified between the two.

        I just don’t understand the hate towards a winner because they apparently “robbed” another deserving actor. I’m not happy that Steve Carrell is never gonna win an Emmy for Michael Scott, but I’m not throwing blame at Jim Parsons for his genius work as Sheldon Cooper. No need to take it out on ‘em.

      • Julie

        That’s funny because I felt the same way. I love The Good Wife and Julianna Margulies, but I really really wanted Connie Britton to win. I am just so glad that Kyle Chandler and the show (for writing) finally won!

      • lap

        There is noooo way Julianna Margulies work could touch Connie Britton/Tami Taylor. She may not have been her normal powerhouse self in the last episode, but overall there she blows Margulies out of the water.The Good Wife is a great show, but it’s not on FNL level. If Peggy Olsen won that would’ve been cool.

      • kim in kentucky

        Sorry, Elizabeth Moss got ROBBED for “The Suitcase” on Mad Men – she was the leading actress for that episode

    • i *think*

      Katie is a Stepford wife who has to take massive doses of xanax to survive her mind numbingly boring life. At least, that’s how it appears. Her lack of affect is a little odd & chilling. Or … at least unusual. Like her face is numb.

      • inga

        wouldn’t you be if you were married to a crazy, powerful, in the closet homosexual, scientoligist who dictates every move you make!

      • *i think*

        x 1000 yes ! You’d think having that much money would be fun. Brief shining moments of giddiness. And that Tom “Does his own stunts” Cruise would be a little animated around the house. But instead: Off-Kilter Katie.

      • JanS

        To those of you making disparaging remarks about Katie Holmes lop-sided mouth and numb face; she had Bell’s palsy which causes facial paralysis.

    • etm

      “lop-sided mouth”, “vacant stare”
      You’ve described Katie Holmes perfectly!

    • Jen

      I’m with T-crab here – Katie’s dress was horrid and there is no life in her, just wooden.

      • yusuf

        šaubos, ka aizgūts no minētā resursa. Runa ir par tnneedcēm šāda tipa portālu attīstībā. Mode, ja gribat Lai vai kā, jaunumi ir, bet ne pasakaini. , vienalga prieks, ka portāls ir atgriezies. Jo ir ierasts, ērts un bez piepūles. Novērtēju.

    • tv fan

      Tcrab, you are so right about Katie Holmes delivery and her mouth. It reminds me of Anne Hathaway’s brilliant dead on impression of Katie Holmes when she hosted SNL last year.

    • stephenkc

      Would EW PLEASE just put Ken Tucker out to pasture! This is the third or fourth “event” review he’s done in the past year or so in which he has heaped glowing praise on what the rest of the world recognizes as a steaming pile of awfulness. Yes, last night’s Emmy’s managed a few fun and clever moments. But as a whole, it was stilted, sophomoric and dull. Just dreadful.

  • Kyle

    How is it that Steve Carrell not mention in your article? To me him not winning thats the big surprise tonight

    • Wow

      his loss was not mentioned because Jim Parsons (a gay actor) beat him, and iit has become obvious that EW has a blantant gay agenda!

      • Woot

        Worst. Trolling. Ever.

      • Wow

        @Woot who the hell is trolling?..in fact I don’t even know what that means, if you don’t like what I have to say, tell me your opinion, but don’t leave nonsense about trolling!..I am not in 3rd grade talk like an adult!

      • Wow

        here is a reviw from the chicago sun times a newspaper without an agenda “Anne Hathaway and James Franco flopped as Oscar co-hosts. Ricky Gervais didn’t exactly light it up at the Golden Globes — a fact he reminded viewers of during Sunday’s Emmys, which didn’t do much to turn the trend around.

        Host Jane Lynch gave it her all, bless her heart, dancing in “triple Spanx” while singing her way through the sets of various shows during an intro that was long on time and short on laughs….Overall, I’d say Coach Sue got a C. It wasn’t a train wreck, but it wasn’t Jimmy Fallon’s “Born to Run,” either”

      • HoneyB

        I would like to know why you think there is a gay agenda and where your source is for Jim Parsons being gay. I don’t find the Office funny (nor do I enjoy The Big Bang Theory), but Steve Carrel’s not winning doesn’t equate to a gay agenda at EW.

      • Ryan

        what an irritating post – gay agenda? How is a recap of the show and it’s winners pushing an agenda? To me, this brief article describes the upsets and wins of the night. I don’t think it was promoting anything but the actual show. Stop looking for something to stir the pot with. (and yes, you are “trolling”, as your sole purpose is to anger or upset)

      • Wow

        @Ryan sorry if me expressing my opinion angers or upsets you, maybe you should become a little more secure with yourself, these are my opinions, and in my opnion is this website seems to have a gay agenda as a whole.in it’s reporting, ms Lynch gave a very lackluster performance and yet it is represented here as a success, and I do think here sexuality comes into play, if it had been say Whoopi Goldberg instead they would have been all over her

      • SJ

        Hey WOW, half of Hollywood is gay. A lot of people in your hometown are, too. Fearing the “gay agenda” just further ostracises those who are intolerant of those who are “diffURNT” than them. What’s even funnier is Jane Lynch made a gay agenda joke and it’s like you don’t get the punchline. Sad.

      • Wow

        read my later posts, I too am gay, that is why I feel comfortable saying this, I do not fear a “Gay Agenda”, I never said that the telecast itself or that Hollywood has a gay agenda, what I am saying is that this website and it’s publication EW seems to have a reverse bias in it’s reporting when it comes to gay performers or characters, which as a gay man, is just as irritatating as homophobia, I do not want to be put down because I am gay, nor do I want fake praise because of it either! and example would be EW’s coverage of Sean Hayes getting a sitcom deal with NBC making front page news and yet when his straight costars from Will & Grace were cast in shows it was barely mentioned, last year a Character from CW’s 9010 remake came out out of the closet and there was story after story about it, yet the show is barely even mentiioned otherwise, how they fawn over the boring but gay Character played by Darren Criss on Glee..the list goes on!

      • Wow

        I want to live in a world where being gay is no different then being left handed, or having green eyes, maybe a little different but no big deal one way or the other, and that is the point I have been trying to make, and to be praised or singled out simply because of ones sexuality as EW tends to do, is not doing anyone any favors!

      • @Wow

        Sue me, I loved Jimmy Fallon’s “Born to Run”.

      • Wow

        lol, I loved it too, thought he should have hosted again, he did a much better job, “Born To Run” is an Award Show highlight to me!

      • Wow

        I loved it too, thought Fallon should have hosted again!

      • Wow

        one more thing then I will let this go, a couple of years ago openly gay actor Neil Patrick Harris hosted and did a fantastic job, it earned praise and deserved it, but to say Jane Lynch did an excellent job as EW did, when clearly she was just sub par, is just pandering!

      • Leslie

        wow, Wow, the breeders really crucified you for speaking your peace, well this Lesbian agrees with you, BAD is BAD, whether it be gay, straight or in between, and as much as I love Jane, she was not very good as host!

    • Wow

      @jSJ in fact I think the producres of the telecast were mildly homophobic when the writers of “Modern Family” and Downton Abbey” mentioned their gay partners they were not shown in the audience and yet when julianna margulies and steve levitan mentioned their spouces they were shown, fairness goes both ways!

  • shdrew

    Were we watching the same show?! I thought as far as presentations went, this was one of the most boring, unfunny Emmys in years. I love Jane Lynch, but she deserved much better material than what she had. And the dialog between presenters was just painful.

    • Pierce Hawthorne

      Ken Tucker was the only critic that gave good reviews to James Franco and Anne Hathaway for the Oscar Telecast so it is hard to take his good review this time seriously!

      • SaraS

        Agree. They really should replace him – I would wish for Darren, who does the Jersey Shore recaps. He is hilarious and “with it”.
        I, too, was so disappointed Steve Carrell wasn’t recognized. What is WRONG with his peers!? He’s been genius on that show for 7 years.

  • wow

    did we watch the same show?..the opening number was embarrasingly bad!, as were all the taped bits, again I feel like EW has a gay agenda, if a gay person does something it has to be fabulous!, and I say this as a gay man, gay people can flop too!, and I am sorry but Jane Lynch flopped as a host, Jimmy Fallon was much better last year!..the only saving grace was the Lonely Island, and the amususing acceptance speeches by the producer of “Modern Family” Steve Levitan …who should have his own show, he is good looking and funny!…epic fail for Lynch though!

    • Just Sayin’

      Totally agreed. I was cringing through the entire opening, especially since you could tell no one in the audience was laughing when they were supposed to. I knew EW would give it a good review because they have a massive hard on for Lynch but you just CANT beat Fallon’s opener last year. Sorry Gleeks.

      • lady

        You realize that there were (gasp!) gay people in the Born to Run opener as well? I guess you just sublimate your gay agenda into weak hate.

      • Wow

        not saying that the Emmy’s have a gay agenda, or that there is anything wrong with gay people on television, I myself am gay, “Modern Family” is one of the best sitcom’s on tv, what I am saying is that EW seems to push or give a pass to anything that is remotley gay at all costs, there treatment of the two new characters last year from the tv show “Glee” proved that, they prasied the boring saintly gay character played by Darren Criss to high heaven, while downplaying and even mocking the more goofy true to life, but straight character played by Chord Overstreet, I have other examples, true critique should not be defined by someone’s sexuality, gay or straight, I am just for fairness!

      • Wow

        Furthermore I think Jane Lynch is a wonderfully talented actress who was great in “The 40 Yr Old Virgin”, “Best in Show” (where gasp she played a lesbian), and in the first season of “Glee”, but she was not in her element hosting this show, and whether it was her fault or the writing, she should not get a pass simply because she is gay!

      • Chet

        Wow, you do realize Jane did not win, neither did Glee or chris colfer, or eric stonestreet who plays gay or jesse tyler ferguson who is and plays it. NPH wasn’t nominated. Last I checked the rest of the winners in comedy or drama were all straight.

      • Wow

        read my post again, I said from the get go, that I do not think The Emmys themselves have a gay agenda, I am saying that this website and magazine EW seems to have a gay agenda in the way they report things!

      • mojackcity

        totally agree

      • Leslie

        @Chet check again because Jim Parsons is a card carrying friend of Dorothy, Way Gay!..we claim him, google him, not out yet, but yes GAY!

    • SueAnn

      I think you have a straight agenda.

      • Wow

        I am gay, , so how can I have a straight agenda, just don’t think anyone should get a free pass for a poor performance just because of sexuality!

      • Trist

        Stereotyping it drives me nuts.We get a lot of jrniualosts who just aren’t interested in anything other than confirming their preconceived ideas with some evidence’ even when the evidence doesn’t exist or contradicts what they want to say. Five years after the fact, there are still articles claiming that the number of egg and sperm donors dropped through the floor when the law on anonymity was changed. It didn’t the numbers actually went up. If they’d bothered to check the publicly available stats on the HFEA website they’d know this is a non-story but no, bad news is so much more entertaining.Then, and I hate to say it, there are the articles in women’s mags who want a very specific story about a grieving infertile couple given hope by a donor and how they had suffered for so long but look there was a happy ending. I know this is what they DO and it’s also the kind of story that helps recruit donors, but y’know, it’s not the whole picture.

  • Mackensie

    Sorry Ken Tucker, but I can and will argue against an Emmy’s that doesn’t give Steve Carell/Michael Scott his dues.

    • Just Sayin’

      I thought Steve should’ve one also, but not just because it was his last season and he deserves his “dues”. That’s no reason to win an award.

    • History

      Steve Carell now joins a long list of TV legends who never recieved an emmy for Signature roles including Jerry Orbach as Lenny Briscoe, Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha Stephens, Rosanne Barr as Rosanne Connor, and Bob Newhart for any of his roles, the list goes on…it is a damn shame, they should spread these things out more evenly!

      • Mikke

        Rosanne won once.

      • Dee Jones

        Roseanne did win in `93.

      • Dustin

        Correction: Roseanne won the emmy for Roseanne in 1993 i believe.

      • History

        you are right I was thinking of John Goodman who did not win as her Husband Dan Connor

      • HoneyB

        Steve Carrel is hardly legendary.

  • Just Sayin’

    I thought Jane Lynch was a horrible choice for host. That opener was painfully unfunny…and i dont know who’s idea it was to have Joel McHale, Zachary Levi and others stand off to the side the whole night and sing, but that was also painful. I guess they were trying to do a little homage to Glee but it was stupid. Singing at the Emmys was done better last year by host, Jimmy Fallon. Fox should’ve just recruited the whole bubbly cast of Glee to host instead of “everyone’s favorite” sassy chick who wears a tracksuit in every episode.

    • PN

      Maybe the Glee cast took the night off and didn’t sing on the stage, so they got these actors to do it. Everybody thinks that they can sing like the more experienced artists when they know they can’t.

    • Jim

      I thought it was a nice way to honor those on larger casts but will never be nominated (Merideth from Office, Robyn from HIMYM, Fez from That 70s and what ever ever shows….etc……

      • SweetBaby

        [...] Staff Writer wrote an post worth rneaidg today.Here’s a quick excerpt:Food and Drug Administration. PPD partnered with Takeda to develop the compound. Under PPD’s agreement with Takeda, the FDA’s acceptance of the NDA filing triggers a $15 million milestone payment to PPD. This milestone … [...]

    • Sara

      I just kept feeling bad for Joel McHale.

  • Kelly

    While I am glad that Mad Men won, Jon Hamm and Elizabeth Moss were robbed. “The Suitcase” was one of the most outstanding hours of television ever. They keep getting better and better with every passing moment. What do these lovely and talented actors need to do to get an Emmy? Seems the work they did this past season far surpassed the other very talented actors.

    • Joe

      I agree with everything in this post. “The Suitcase” was the best episode of television I have ever seen.

      • Anwar

        I absolutely loved your alrcite! I giggled my way through and I know exactly what you mean. It’s sounds really painful for you and the rest of your friends to hold back all the giggles and comments. :’)

    • Dave

      I agree. Jon Hamm and Elisabeth Moss really deserved those awards. I can’t really fault Kyle Chandler winning too much, mainly because it’s always nice to see an underdog win. And Chandler is really terrific. But I still think Hamm should have won. And Moss definitely should have won over Juliann Margulies. That really annoyed me.

    • Ethan

      That’s what happen when you explicitly state that you wrote the episode just so Moss and Hamm can get an Emmy. I’m sure this is a turnoff to voters.

      • HoneyB

        Gotta agree. Love the episode, but it was off putting to hear it was Emmy bait. At the same time, I almost wish every episode were written to be that good. It’d make television a lot more interesting.

      • c

        I agree. It was blatant emmy bait.

    • Rob

      Disagree. Kyle Chandler is a great actor. It might have been an unexpected win, but it certainly wasn’t undeserved. People really missed out from some great performances, acting-wise, by not watching Friday Night Lights. Hamm is a really good actor. Chandler is better.

      • Ronnie1

        I really love both “Mad Men” and “Friday Night Lights”, two rare instances of QUALITY television. Both Jon Hamm and Kyle Chandler are terrific actors. But one outstanding episode (“The Suitcase”) can’t compare to FIVE years of outstanding acting in an underappreciated series. Jon Hamm will have a chance to win next year…but FNL is gone, and it’s wonderful to see that series get AT LEAST two awards, when it should’ve received more, in the past and this year.

      • ALM

        Agree with your entire post, Ronnie.

      • Nyuszika

        Right after checking out your web site’s poor rnaking in the internet search engine We thought you need to know exactly what is link wheel backlinks. definitely will boost your rnaking in the yahoo and google.

  • teresa

    I thought the Emmy’s were pretty good. Some of the speeches were well done. And Jane did a fine job as a host. I wanted Steve to win and it sucks that he didn’t.

    • Mahamadamin

      I know it sounds crazy but look at Craig’ss list, that’s how i meet the love of my life. You don’t need to look for love there, maybe just ask if anoyne knows any local hangouts where you could meet someone new. It’s worth a try. Good luck!

  • JJ

    Emmys Producers, please let Amy Poehler host next year’s Emmys (or whenever NBC gets its turn again)? She was comedic gold throughout the show. Per Melissa, it was Amy’s idea for the pageant thing. Good for Melissa (who herself is hilarious), but I gotta think Bridesmaids gave her a little goodwill for the Emmy voters (considering the Academy loves actresses starring in big/critical acclaimed movies)

  • Chris

    While I’m thrilled that Kyle Chandler won (anyone besides me think it was adorable that he thought his chances of winning were so low that he didn’t have a speech and didn’t think to mention Connie or his wife until after his speech was over?), I thought Jane Lynch and the horrible writing were the low points of the show.

  • Jay

    -Best moment: Kyle Chandler winning (and Minka Kelly presenting the award)..and Jason Katims!

    -Was bummed for Parks and Rec…I love MF, but Parks and Rec had a pretty perfect season..o and Amy Poehler (but happy for Ty Burrell and Julie Bowen)

    • Janet Snakehole

      I 100% agree about Parks and Rec. Modern Family was good but it gets a little bit stale if you watch every episode. Parks and Rec had a perfect season. I mean literally a perfect season, each actor was on their game, the writing was perfect, the execution was excellent. I’m torn on Poehler not winning though, I love her but I also love Melissa McCarthy (though I don’t watch Mike and Molly). Either way Parks & Rec was robbed!

      • The Chosen One

        I will forever be a fan of Melissa McCarthy’s for her one-minute steal-the-whole-damned-scene screamingly funny appearance in Go from 1999. I don’t watch Mike & Molly either, but she deserves the success that is coming her way!!

      • Lauren

        Definitely agree. Modern Family is hilarious and I love it. But Parks and Rec is hands-down the funniest show on tv right now. It has an amazingly funny cast and is very well-written. But as long as MF or P&R take home the win I’m satisfied. Just as long as none of those mind-numbing comedies on CBS win.

    • Hope

      I totally agree with Jay about Friday Night Lights. Having Jason Katims and Kyle Chandler win for Friday Night Lights made my night. I was so glad to see Kyle Chandler get the recognition for the show which was long overdue. I really will miss that show.

      It was also really nice that Minka Kelly was the presenter for Kyle Chandler’s award.

  • ks

    I’m glad that EW did a live blog. The Emmys did not come on here due to time delay-thank goodness! I watched the winners and was able to skip the bad singing, bad dialogue, and horrid jokes.

  • Aeiouy

    One of the best award shows in memory. Quick paced, humorous, almost never dragged. Kudos to Mark Burnett for producing a top notch awards show and thumbs up to Jane Lynch.

    Jeers to anyone who thinks someone they like not winning somehow reduces the quality of the show itself.

    • Reality

      no what reduced the quality of the show were lame jokes, bad singing, poor staging, and a horrible opening number, Jane was out of her league, they should have asked Jimmy Fallon to come back, he ruled last year, it was much better show then this boring debacle!

    • Lauren

      It was the best awards show I have seen in a long time. It was fun to watch, the mood was light and all of the award winners seemed genuinely pleased. Also, it didn’t run over its time! I think the producers did a good job keeping everyone on pace. I always hate how at the Oscars, the first few winners are given all the time in the world to talk so the last half hour winners are all cut off after 30 seconds. This felt like every one was given the same amount of time, from the beginning and throughout.

  • MWeyer

    Nothing about Peter Dinklage’s fantastic win? Considering how he imbued the character from the novel so well, truly great to see him get rewarded for it.

    • sv

      This. Genuinely surprised that there was no mention of Dinklage – it seems that many people thought he should win, but wouldn’t. One of the better wins of the night, for sure.

    • jmo

      Agreed. Where’s the love for Peter? I was excitedly screaming when he won, so much so that I’m sure the neighbors through someone was killing me!

    • Lovmore

      Wicked is so fantastic, I saw it on staruday and I’m still buzzing from it, it was just so amazing. especially Rachel Tucker, her voice is unbelievable. We went to see Lee mainly (he sort of stole our pen again. he did that at Arthur Saville’s Crime too but at least he brought it back both times) but even if he wasn’t in it the show it would still be the one to see.

      • Bebep

        Je partage tout e0 fait ton asalyne sur l’explication des produits Le the9 est un produit qui me9rite et qui doit eatre mieux explique9 !Je trouve ton ide9e de rose de vents vraiment excellente ! Ce serait super e9le9gant et e7a remplirait le besoin d’explications.

  • Aeiouy

    I would add that if winners make the show then most people are pissed about the fnl wins as nobody watched that show

    • Boy

      Dear HP,I must admit you bring up some valid points rdregaing religious freedom, but let’s try a Separation-of-Church-and-State approach here and begrudge me a few valid questions. Without using any sort of religious-based morality, please answer the following:1. How would the gay couple next door to a heterosexual couple undermine the heterosexual couple’s marriage or ability to raise their children if they were to be married?2. Why should I be denied the right to see my partner in the hospital when he is seriously or critically ill?3. If my partner were to die, why should I be denied estate benefits and let his assets be handed over to a family that hates him for being gay?4. If a lesbian couple raises a child together via artificial insemination, why should one of them be denied the right to continue to raise the child if the biological mother were to die?5. All marriages are in essence a civil union in the eyes of the government, while the term marriage itself is religious in nature. With that in mind, why should gay couples be denied a civil union?6. A closeted gay man/woman marries a heterosexual and they have children together. When they get divorced, why should the gay man/woman be denied parental guardianship or visitation? Why should their children be barred from staying in the same house or having any contact with the gay man/woman’s new partner?All of these scenarios happen every year, tearing families apart in unimaginable ways. They are also used by the religious right as reasons to continue to deny gay marriages. Still, these are some of the basic tenets and rights the government bestows upon heterosexual couples. There would be hell to pay if the government were to consider marriage only in terms of children and thus remove some of these rights from heterosexual couples, as well.Earlier you replied to a comment rdregaing sterile/infertile spouses, single parent families, and childless marriages by stating, they are the exception not the rule. In other words, while marriage is tied to children, there are exceptions to the rule that are so small, so insignificant, that the costs associated in banning them outweigh the benefit. Let’s just suppose that the 10%-of-the-adult-population-are-homosexuals rule is correct (and some recent studies hint that with tolerance increasing and thus more homosexuals being honest and open, the number is probably closer to 15-20%), wouldn’t that make homosexual unions a small and insugnificant exception to the rule as well? And if factoring in that not even 100% of the heterosexual population gets married, if you estimated that the same percentage of homosexuals would get married, we’re talking an even smaller percentage of the adult, married population. And one could definitely argue that the cost of banning gay marriages would outweigh the benefits.I also must admit that as a gay man I am sick of being lumped in with polygamy, beastiality, and incest. The argument that these elements would be allowed if gay marriages were approved is the last card that all religious moralists seem to play. To think that gay couples would be anymore apt to allow these elements to happen than heterosexual couples is preposterous.Sincerely,TimP.S. While you keep bringing up race in your arguments, it’s surprising that no one has pointed out that most of the major religions in this country that continue to practice were at one time opposed to integration and interracial unions. Maybe not in all portions of the U.S., but it was definitely the case.

Page: 1 2 3 8
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.

Latest Videos in TV

TV Recaps

Powered by WordPress.com VIP