posted
Over at EW.com (and presumably in this weeks’ Entertainment Weekly; despite their constant entreaties and veiled threats I let my subscription lapse), they provide their suggestions towards fixing the Emmys. I had mixed reactions.
First off, I agree the Emmys need fixing. Years from now, on my deathbed, my biggest regret will be the loss of those irreplaceable three hours of reality-show-fueled horror, especialy when I knew I could just wait an hour and watch the best 10-15 minutes of it on YouTube. But how to honor our best and brightest without boring the crap out of everybody?
I’m right behind their suggestion of getting Neil Patrick Harris to host. He has the perfect mix of self-assurance, witty ad-libs, honest respect for the craft, and sheer delight in being there that makes for a great host. But I flatly disagree that cable shows and movies should be pushed to the technical Emmys night; some of them are the best shows on TV, why banish them?
Instead, I suggest you get rid of the most annoying, time-wasting part of the show: the presenter bits. Tired and hackneyed, more of a joke themselves than actually amusing, the only presenter jokes that actually work are those which make fun of how bad presenter jokes are (a la Rickles, Stewart, Colbert, et al). Mostly they’re just painful reminders that most presenters aren’t that good in a live situation. Dump ‘em.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
