My Generally Pleased Reactions to the 2026 Golden Globes Awards for TV (And A Preface That I Think I'm Going to Have Repeat For My Fellow Critics)

 

I need to talk my fellow critics for a moment to state something I really think they need to understand.

An awards show – particularly ones that deal with movies and TV but really all of them – are by design going to be overlong, self-congratulatory, bloated affairs where everybody thanks each other, speeches run on forever and maybe occasionally someone gets bleeped. If the host or hostess does their job perfectly, it will be amusing sporadically. If the presenters do their job perfectly, same thing.  That's not a bug in the software, it's the feature.

Any awards show is about the nominees, the winners and the industry. That's all its ever been about. If you haven't realized this by this point in your career I strongly wonder if you have the intellectual capacity to find shows on Netflix in the first place. Or buy a ticket to a movie. Really I'm amazed you can string words together into sentences to bash the awards show in the first place.

I've been arguing as hard as I can the last few years why I can't comprehend why critics are still reviewing awards shows as if they are the movies and TV shows that are nominated. They're not these things any more than they are live concert events. They shouldn't have to meet these standards; they shouldn't have any standards at all. The awards show are not movies and TV; they're for the people in the theater. They don't matter except to those people and a smaller group of people who care about them. If you're not part of the industry and if you haven't seen any of the movies or TV shows (or in the case of last night's Golden Globes both) there's no reason for you to be watching it. And for pure entertainment an award show can't match the power of Sinners or One Battle After Another or TV shows like The Pitt or Hacks.

 Hell The Studio made it clear in no uncertain terms when it did its episode satirizing the Golden Globes who those awards are for and what purpose they have.  Those people who watched it and expected it to be as much as that episode or indeed the entire series have missed the point – which is odd because they think the former is worthy of awards like the Golden Globes to begin with.

I've made it clear for years when I reviewed the Golden Globes or other awards show that dealt with television that I was watching because I cared about the winners and how they reacted. My reviews have reflected that by making it about them and that's because at a certain level, I get that its about them. The vast majority of my fellow critics seem to have taken the position that these awards show are about what the audience should  think about it first and everything else is a secondary consideration.

I truly think we need to have a moratorium on reviews of awards shows in the industry. List the winners, list what they said in their speeches and that's it. These shows are about the industry, not about anyone else. We go to movies and TV shows for entertainment purposes, we watch awards shows honoring them because we care about who wins. If that's a smaller group then the people who watch these shows in the first place, well, that's how Hollywood is. No one should be forced to watch the Golden Globes if they don't want to and honestly for entertainment options you'd be better served watching the movies and TV on streaming to see what everyone's talking about.

On a related note I'm all for puncturing the pretentious nature of Hollywood when it comes to their positions in anything but their industry. But there's a time and place for everything and a ceremony designed where a certain amount of the pretension is being acknowledged and even celebrated is not that place. As someone who's been watching awards shows for thirty years and reviewing them for the last decade I'd like to think I'm an authority on what an emcee should and shouldn't do. A good emcee's job is to entertain the captive audience as well as the audience at home (though trust me, this is one of the few times that this is deservedly a second concern). A good emcee gently pokes the audience in the ribs as well as celebrates them. You don't necessarily have to be a comedian to be good at this; in recent years Anthony Anderson and Kristen Bell have more then demonstrated the absolutely right mixture of gravitas and humor. But you need to remember that your job is not to be an iconoclast.

That's the main reason that every time Ricky Gervais was tapped to host the Golden Globes I approached each time with an increasing amount of dread. My issues with Gervais, I should be clear, are the same I have with Bill Maher. (Coincidentally the two of them were competing against each other for Best Stand-Up Special last night. Guess who won.) I have no problem with their politics; I just think Gervais is a horrible comedian. Even when he was at his peak, I never laughed at him.

And to be clear well before he was tapped to host the first time in 2010 the Golden Globes had been extremely good to him. Both his version of The Office and his series Extras were recognized as Best Comedy by the Golden Globes. They gave him a trophy four full years before the Emmys did. And yet from the start every time he hosted the show you really got the feeling he wanted to be anywhere else. (I know he was drunk before he hosting the last time. He wasn't subtle about it.) It's as if he thought the job was beneath him from the start and his contempt was always clear, despite their continued nominations for far lesser shows over this period. I was actually grateful when he stopped showing up when he was nominated; his mere presence just made me feel uneasy.

Nikki Glaser by contrast always strikes the right balance between admirer and roaster. She loves to make fun of the industry and like her hostess in arms Chelsea Handler she can be incredibly filthy minded about it but you get the feeling how lucky she feels to be there.  I got that feeling last night when she continuously mocked George Clooney and Sean Penn from the start and was just as willing to lampoon the people in TV. My favorite in a long list of gags was "And Martin Short and Steve Martin who prove you're never to old to keep needing money."

You got a sense of that gentle mockery throughout the night. When Sean Hayes, Will Arnett and Jason Bateman (nominated for Best Podcast) came out, Bateman was teased by the announcers. Bateman took it personally. Hayes said: "I loved Ozark." Bateman: "What was it about?" "It was about three seasons too long." Hayes said. Huge laugh on my part. Dave Franco and Zoe Kravitz came out to present Best Actor in a Comedy (I think the fix was in) and they made fun of their Emmy nominated roles in The Studio.  "I'm Zoe Kravitz and I don't need your shrooms"  "I'm Dave Franco and I will absolutely take your shrooms."  Melissa McCarty and Kathryn Hahn came out to present Outstanding Lead Actress in a Limited Series with "And for the first time men are nominated in this category," said Hahn. McCarthy: "It's about time." And it was fun to see Haillee Steinfeld and Ayo Edebiri mock how we all watch TV and films and Edebiri said that she'd seen Sinners in every format including Tik Tok in 297 parts. "Just like the director intended," Steinfeld said.

I saw this behavior played out quite well in some of the film presentations as well. And it was wonderful how when George Clooney came out Don Cheadle came out for moral support and complete roasted him. "Did you win?" Cheadle asked. "No, I didn't." "Been a while. How old are you Chalamet?" "Thirty" the actor said. "He was three the last time you won." Cheadle pointed out. "I've won after Syriana!" Clooney said.

These nights are where no one takes themselves too seriously and I respect the Golden Globes for not doing that.

Now on to the awards. To be clear most of the prizes ended up going as I predicted and in a sense mirrored to the Critics Choice Awards. But the difference were there and I respected them.

When Owen Cooper won for his work in Adolescence he told us about when he had tried out for drama class and he was the only boy which very well might have prepared him for this. Erin Doherty, in the midst of her usual thank yous to everybody, went out of her way to give a special thank you to therapists and the important work they do – and honestly it's hard to argue that point. Stephen Graham this time went out of his way to respect Christine Tremarco, his scene partner on Adolescence. "I'll cut in half, and you can have the top." And the showrunner argued that the series was not about the horrible way of society today but the detritus his generation he and his generation had left behind. He pointed out his cast, including Cooper, as examples of how there are good people out there and that there is hope: one might find it hard to look at now but it is there. I think we all needed that.

When Seth Rogen won for The Studio he couldn't help note how surreal this all was. "We did a show about this," he reminded us. "Zoe and Dave were on it. I really thought the only way that I was ever going to win one of these was to make a show about it." Given the nature of Rogen's long career and particularly the number of TV series and films where he has not received recognition, it's hard to blame him. He said it didn't make sense that he was up against Martin Short and Steve Martin who he'd grown up watching and one day dreamed about beating them. Immediately he took it back.

When The Studio took the prize for Best Comedy Rogen actually went out of his way to thank all of the little people, the crew, the best boy, the gaffer, the craft services people. As someone who has spent his entire life upset that the creative arts awards shows people never got the respect they did in most awards show I appreciated this; considering Colin Farrell did the same thing when he won for The Penguin last year, it's nice to know some of these actors do remember the little people.

Jean Smart won her third Golden Globe in this category and was even more humble then usual. She went out of her way to thank her entire cast and crew, including Hannah Einbinder. (She didn't thank Sal Saperstein, no one did.)

The Drama categories also went as you might expect. Noah Wyle continued his march towards sweeping every awards show in sight, once again thanking John Wells, Scott Gemill, the cast and crew and the first responders and health care professionals. Wells did the same but he added a thank you from Debra Cahn, the producer of The Diplomat, to thank civil servants in general. Wells' speech was more about a reminder of community and the importance of what we do and how important storytelling is. I don't think it can change the world, but it is important and I'm glad for that.

The only real difference from the Golden Globes as opposed to the Critics Choice was Michelle Williams finally won an award for her brilliant work in Dying For Sex. Unfortunately Williams was not there to pick it up but I'm grateful she did win something.

And the high point of the show for me at least was when Rhea Seehorn duplicated her win at the Critics Choice Awards. One of the presenters was Queen Latifah and Seehorn said when she came out to Hollywood she'd done a job with her and she was so nice to her. Seehorn once against expressed enormous gratitude to her fellow nominees – and more importantly all the women as these awards shows. She said she'd been to her share and she was grateful for their company. As always she seemed astonished – "My stomach is still at the table!" she said -and honestly considering just how little recognition she got for her work in Better Call Saul I don't blame her.  No one connected with that show is used to having their name called out at the Golden Globes. (The Critics Choice Awards is another story, which is another reason they rule.) I suspect Seehorn will be telling Vince Gilligan how grateful she is for taking a chance on her for a while.

I should mention that TV got its share of love in other categories as well. Rose Byrne, who has never gotten recognition from any other awards show for her work in Damages or Platonic was given a Best Actress in a Comedy prize for If I Had Legs I'd Kick You. Stellan Skarsgard, who in the last few years TV audiences are starting to become as familiar with as his two sons, won Best Supporting Actor for Sentimental Value. (He said when he took on the role of being a bad father, his sons gave him notes.) Wagner Moura, who has been a fixture on television since Narcos and was nominated for his work in Dope Thief by the Critics Choice last week won his first Golden Globe for The Secret Agent.

And Amy Poehler won the first ever Golden Globe for Best Podcast. As always she was hysterically self-deprecating. "I don't think much of awards shows, but sometimes they get it right" said the actress who is currently 0- for 15 at the Emmys. "I'm grateful to all my fellow podcasters, except NPR. You guys just phone it." And she ended her speech by telling her parents that they could change to watch the Patriots now. Humble even in victory.

Finally to that reviewer who said The Golden Globes was struggling for identity. It has one. It's an awards show. Nothing more, nothing less. If you wanted to watch Industry you had that option and I don't judge the people who did anymore than those who judge me for watching this. I knew what I was expecting, I had a good time watching it and I really liked the winners.  If you wanted more than that…seriously, do you have the intelligence to operate a remote control?

 

Lost 20th Anniversary Episode Retrospective: The 23rd Psalm

 A little personal history to start.

Around 2006 I was starting to feel my way towards my profession of TV criticism and I was following the Emmys with more seriousness then I did before (and in a sense today.) So I was absolutely astounded that July when Lost, which had won Best Drama the previous year, wasn't nominated for Best Drama for Season 2 and would receive just eight nominations overall. It wasn't the most egregious offense the Emmys did that year by a long shot and I knew that even then – they completely shutout The Shield and they didn't nominate Six Feet Under for Best Drama for its final season, which in hindsight is even more appalling.

Now full disclosure: this was the year of the fifth season of 24 the greatest season of that show's entire run, which would deservedly win Best Drama. So I'm partially grateful that two of my favorite shows of all time didn't have to face off and I would have had to choose. (And trust me 24 is going to be getting its own series of articles soon so I can write about that.) But using the transitive property of logic, its very difficult for me to look at the four series that were nominated for Best Drama for 2005-2006 and ask the Emmy judges: "Guys…where were you?"

I admit to having my own issues with The Sopranos at the time and later on but I saw every episode of the three other shows that were nominated that year. Season 2 of Lost was, in my opinion, at least as good as the final season of The West Wing and superior to the second seasons of House and Grey's Anatomy all of which received nominations that year. I've rewatched several of these seasons multiple times over the years and on a level of technical basis, acting, writing and directing Lost holds up as well.

I've written before and will write it again how much of an outlier Lost's record with the Emmys was. It was nominated for Best Drama for Season 1, wasn't nominated for either Season 2 or 3 (though the Golden Globes did nominate it for both) and was nominated for its last three seasons. Even odder is the thinking among critics and fans that much of Season 2 and 3 is inferior to the first season. I never held that when I was watching the show the first time but at a certain level I do get some of the reasoning and I'll talk about some of it in regard to Season 2.

The first flaw has to do with how network television was in the 2000s and in fact would be for most of the next ten years. (It altered some in the mid 2010's but it's now changing back to the old model basically across the board. The circle of television.) Like all network dramas Lost was 22 episodes long, in fact in Season 2 it was 24 episodes long. And if you were growing up in that period by design not every episode in a season was going to be perfect. It's less obvious in a procedural like Law & Order or House but in a show that was essentially serialized Lost it was going to be more obvious then it was for Sopranos or Deadwood. (Back then HBO was basically the only game in town when it came to television.)

The second flaw is the fact that in the second season Lindelof and Cuse still had very little idea of where to take the show. Yes, they'd opened the Hatch and they went aside and yes the raft had blown up but once everybody had reunited a third of the way through the season the writers had to figure out where to go next. And as a result there are probably more story arcs that lead nowhere in Season 2 then any other season. Jack teaming with Ana Lucia to train an army, Sawyer deciding to steal the guns and then doing nothing with it, Charlie's having dreams about Aaron – the writers just start many of them and then seem to forget about them by the end of the season.

While I understand how that might appear from a Lost fan as someone who even at this early age understood the nuts and bolts of TV better than most, these flaws were a feature of TV, not a bug. The X-Files had its share of crappy monsters of the week and so did Buffy. 24 had more than its share of lame story arcs during its run (just say cougar) and Alias had a lot of individual episodes that didn't seem to fit in with the overarching plot. So arguing the second season isn't working that way is a case of not seeing the jungle for the trees. And that's particularly telling because some of the greatest episodes of the entire series aired in Season 2, something even the Emmys acknowledged.

'The 23^rd Psalm' would be nominated for Best Writing in a Drama Series and though it would lost to The Sopranos it ranks as one of the most epic episodes in the show's entire history. Few episodes tell a more sweeping story in their flashbacks that this one and fewer still find a way to correlate exact with events on the island, as well as solving a mystery in the previous season. It is the first episode in Season 2 to argue that there is some form of destiny that has been guiding the characters here, an idea that the show had let simmer but not directly referred to since the season premiere. And to top it off, it gives us our first real look at 'the monster' that we've had glimpses at but never seen in the flesh – or as we see here, in the puff.

If the Pilot of Lost had the appearance of a feature film, The 23^rd Psalm has that same epic structure when it comes to the flashbacks involving Eko. You could see a story like this being the plot of an excellent foreign film or even a pretty good independent film, right down to the yellowish tincture that overlays the cinematography. Lost would often tell exceptional stories of its characters in the course of several episodes; this one could very well have served as a bubble episode in so many other series.

The story of Eko and Yemi is framed in religious terms. Eko and Yemi were two young boys living in Nigeria playing soccer when a group of militiamen stormed the village to destroy their lives. We see Eko make a choice that sacrificing his soul for his brother, discarding his cross away in a symbol of massive significance for both him and Yemi. Years later, the transitions in their lives could not be more clear: Eko is a bloodthirsty criminal; Yemi is a priest. In other circumstances the symbolism would be heavy-handed, but because the two men discuss the world in the kind of terms that so many of us consider the idea of God and men, even as Eko tells his version of the truth he frames it in a way that makes us wonder if this is how he sees the world.

Yemi spends much of the episode as if he is high and superior to his brother, but the fact he still wears his brother’s cross does indicate something. In his final scene Yemi shows that there is still a part of brother that he believes can be saved, and we see that in a way Yemi sacrifices himself to save Eko – though in this case, it does cost him his life.

If it were only for the scale of the story told by the flashbacks The 23^rd Psalm would be a brilliant episode on its own. But the action on the island is just as exceptional to watch because it represents something that we have never seen on the series to date and will almost never see again. All of the mysterious events that we have seen so far seem to be ones that only the island can explain. When Eko breaks open the Virgin Mary statue and reveals the heroin inside, this is the first time a character can explain one of the island’s mysteries. The shattering of it in front of Claire is symbolic as well; by destroying it, this shatters her faith in Charlie and she will essentially not trust him or even speak to him for the remainder of the season.

Charlie clearly wants to do damage control but he’s in no position to do so: Eko demands that Charlie take him to the statue and he calls him on every single bluff that Charlie makes. Charlie is belligerent in these scenes but not necessarily unpleasant; much of the dialogue he exchanges with Eko is mean-spirited (particularly when he points out the dried blood on his ‘Jesus Stick’) but in a way he's also trying to figure out not only what’s happening around him but how Eko knows so much about it. Like Eko, Charlie is a man of faith but his belief has been shaky ever since he found the statues and traipsing through the island behind a man with such certainty to his purpose would be unsettling to anyone.

We never get a direct explanation as to how this Beechcraft from Nigeria ended up on an island in the South Pacific (two separate bits of information in the last two seasons will do so when you put them together) but just as it is becoming clear the passengers on Oceanic 815 were meant to be on this plane, you get the feeling this plane came here for the same reason – it was meant to be a way for Eko to come to the island. And looking back it seems that the reason he was supposed to come to the island comes in arguably the most remarkable scene in the episode.

We haven’t seen the monster since it nearly killed Locke in the first season finale, but now it shows itself again – and it heads right for Eko. There was clearly supposed to be a comparison between Eko and Locke in this regard. In Walkabout, the monster came straight for Locke and he walked away from it unharmed and was strengthened in his faith in the island. The monster makes a similar run at Eko in this episode and this time seems to show him snapshots of his past. (I am relying on Finding Lost for what he actually saw in those snapshots; multiple pauses and viewings of the episode have left me unable to see much of what Nikki Stafford did.) What is clear then and now is what happened: Eko stood his ground, stared the monster dead in the eye without blinking, and it retreats, for the first time not having hurt or killed anyone. When Charlie comes down understandably baffled (as we all know he barely survived his encounter with the monster) he is stunned not only by what he saw but by Eko’s simple four word explanation as to why he didn’t run: “I was not afraid.” When Charlie tries to press him on this Eko continues on his mission and Charlie, now clearly in awe of him, shuts up the rest of the way.

Based on this and what we see in the rest of Season 2, it’s pretty clear that Eko was being drawn as a parallel – maybe even a rival – to Locke going forward. I can only speculate on what might have happened, but you could see the two men engaged in their own personal struggles going forward with Eko’s presence being important for the rest of the survivors. Could much of what happened in the original framework for the series come down to a struggle between Locke and Eko? We will never know.

What is clear is that Eko, as with Locke, was being set up as much a disciple of the island but clearly framing his faith in religious terms. When he takes the cross of the body of Yemi and puts it around his neck, it is clear he has essentially become the island’s priest. As he and Charlie stand over the  plane that Eko is setting on fire (which is uses as both a significance of both ending and beginning in religious terms) he acknowledges that he is a priest. He has spent his life prior to this point pretending to be one but as he says the title passage (and Charlie joins him) over the plane it is clear that he has embraced the good and pure part of his nature.

In what is a rave of the episode in Back to the Island St. James argues that one of the strengths of Season 2 overall is 'how casually it reveals major information.  So is it with this episode where…

"…the show not only reveals the Monster's form but also a retroactive argument for the flashbacks' relevance to the on-Island plot."

Late in the series run we will be told that when characters are brought to the island "their past doesn't matter'.  Based on later events and what we see the Monster do, this may be seen as the strongest counter-argument that this is not the case. And the fact that when Eko faces his past and doesn't blink is the clearest indication that the writers might very well have had long-term plans for him that unfortunately never came to fruition.

Season Two may be the season where the show leans hardest into the idea of religious faith as opposed to the faith that Locke demonstrates in the island. We see it when Charlie, also the most devout character on the show, is paired with Eko and we will see it again when Desmond shows up later this season (spoiler alert) But it is Eko and his relationship with the world in purely religious terms that makes this point clear: he is the only character we shall meet who mentions a higher power in his thinking and always in a serious manner. And it his relationship with God that sells the fact that his brother was in the plane that crashed on the island. Again as St. James puts it: "Yes, a magical Island surely drew these characters to some sort of reckoning but the added dose of deep and abiding faith in God helps sell the idea. From birth these brothers have been in one crucible or another. What's the Island in the face of that?"

The final minutes of the episode (as what will become Eko’s theme music play over it) are among the most beautiful in the season and indeed the series. We see a montage of the survivors bonding in a way we rarely do – Jin introduces a surprised Ana Lucia to Sun and presents her with a fish in a way that she is astonished by. Hurley walks over to Libby to help her put her tent together – you can see even now he’s smitten by her. Sawyer looks at himself in the mirror over the haircut Kate has given him and when Jack comes by with his antibiotics for his injuries there’s a tranquility between them we rarely see.

And the episode ends with Claire essentially throwing Charlie out, which based on what she’s seen is a rational decision. It turns out to be a well-founded one as in the final shot of the episode we sadly find out that Eko really didn’t need to ‘replace the one he broke.’

This episode is a showcase for Adewale Akinnouye-Agbaje as Eko not just for Lost but for the actor overall. Akinnouye-Agbaje had shot to prominence for his role as Simon Adebisi on OZ a brutal, bloodthirsty Nigerian emigrant turned drug dealer who was renowned for being the most viscerally evil character on a show filled with ruthless monsters. There's clearly a common thread that led to his casting as Eko but we saw so little evidence of it in our introduction to him that the actors presence said more than anything else. Now he gets to show a range he had yet to do in television proper as we see the anger and goodness in him in every scene he's in and sometimes within seconds of each other, both on the island and in the flashback. It is small wonder that this committed him to a fan favorite among Losties and I was no exception.

The apocrypha (to use a term appropriate to his character) was that after reading the script to The 23^rd Psalm, Adewale Akinnouye-Agbaje said that there was no reason for Eko to be on the series more than a season. He asked Cuse and Lindelof to be written out of the show at the end of Season 2, but they convinced him to stay around a little longer. In Finding Lost, it is quoted that there had always been a discussion as to how to write to the character out. As we now know, this was not the truth. Akinnouye-Agbaje did not like living in Hawaii and the writers had planned for Eko for much longer than a season. That Darlton was willing to shade the truth speaks to their desire to protect their actors.

Therefore much of this episode's power is dampened by the knowledge that none of the plans for Eko put forth will ever come to fruition. But that is irrelevant. The images and power of the performances can't be erased from the mind regardless nor should they be.

Since I began with a personal note I think its fitting to end this article with one. Prior to the series finale I did a brief list of the episode that I thought represented overall the best work of each season of Lost. 'The 23^rd Psalm' was by choice for Season 2 in 2010.  This was not a difficult choice or an original one: by that point numerous fans and critics had long ranked it one of the all-time greats. (I had no idea of its Emmy nominations.) There are other classics in Season 2 but none which better express how different Lost was then any show on television at the time and indeed twenty years later, few shows have been able to match

Homicide Rewatch: Hostage, Part One

 

Written by James Yoshimura; story by Tom Fontana & Julie Martin

Directed by Ted Demme

 

The opening sequence where Gaffney and Bonfather double team Al about the squad could seem very much like the bosses being the bosses. To be sure Gaffney is just as much a sexist prick as before, this time demonstrating some homophobia which should come as a surprise to no one. But the difference is for once Al is arguing in favor of the rule book.

As he talks about the doctors saying that Frank has made great progress and that the department owes it to him to come back, we can't help but think that this is the first time he has quoted procedure. When he makes it clear that Pembleton was hurt on the job and that the department is obligated to bring him back Bonfather is right when he says is using the rules for once and that he usually makes it up as he goes. And when Gaffney and Bonfather point out the very real possibility of what might have if the old Frank comes back – that he might get worked up in the box, suffer another stroke, drop dead in the squad room – and argue that it will be on Giardello this time if it happens, for once he doesn’t have a real defense.  Giardello is struck dumb at this.

And it is worth noting that its not clear in the opening minutes whether Pembleton's decision to return has the support of the rank and file. We've always known Frank was never the most popular man in the unit, respected for his work but cold and aloof to everyone around him, if not outright arrogant. Kellerman and Lewis are talking about his medical condition but it's not clear if they're concerned for a colleague or for their own liability. At one point Lewis will actually mock his potential way of speaking. Munch is openly hostile to the idea of Frank returning, something he doesn't bother to hide when he goes out with Bayliss on a call. Howard seems more than willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps because she was in a similar position after being shot in the heart a year and a half ago.  Only Bayliss seems genuinely anticipatory and it will become clear almost immediately how much this is not rejoined by his partner. (Interestingly Brodie seems the most clear-headed about what to expect from Frank post-stroke and he's remarkably lucid about what to do and what not to do. We'll actually learn more about why down the road.)

When Bayliss answers the phone he decides to bring Munch with him as a partner, very reluctantly. To this point on Homicide they've never gone out on a call together: Bayliss has always been with Pembleton and it is rare that he's gone out with someone else in the four seasons so far. Munch has worked with multiple partners even when Bolander was in the unit and he did the same with Russert. And its clear Munch is in a bad mood. It's conceivable some of this has to do with the fact that for the second time in little more than a year, he's without a partner. As we're told in the opening Russert has gone off to France, though no one is quite sure why even among the squad. Bolander has quietly retired after his suspension ended. Munch is feel left behind again and it is possible that the way the squad is willing to bend over backwards to let Frank in really does chafe. He might be cold about it to Bayliss and he may not like that he sounds like Gaffney but he has a point.

As always Homicide is patient. Pembleton is late getting to the squad; Mary is bringing him in. He's late enough that some of the detectives start worrying about him. When we finally get our first look at him just before the episode cuts to commercial the writers have built it to perfection. Using the Cowboy Junkies classic song: "This Street, This Man, This Life' – and praise the lord both streaming and syndication kept that moment in for all to witness – Frank steps out of his car. He know has a head of hair he hasn't had since the first season. He moves slower, in contrast to the confident stride we associate with him. He hesitates before opening the door to the squad, looking back at Mary for reassurance he didn't need before. And he confronts the stairs slowly holding the banister.

When he finally enters the squad there's a notable pause as everyone looks. Howard is the first to come to him, then he walks to Meldrick and Mike. When Kellerman says its good to see him: Frank says: "You too" Then he pauses and seems to need to remember Mike's first name with a struggle. There's a clear sense that's he trying to muster the old Pembleton bravado asking if everyone looks disappointed but with the clear stagger in his speech and his slurred works, for once he can't pull it off. Even the compliment Lewis says about liking his hair is a direct affront: "I didn't want you to see the scars."

Giardello calls Frank in immediately after he arrives.  Frank is no more welcoming his advice then before but this time Al doesn't seem to care. He tells Frank that department regulations mean he can't be allowed back on the street until he qualifies on the range. Frank says he's always been a lousy shot (we saw as much in firing practice before the stroke). Gee tells him that he will be working half shifts, answering phones and while he tries to say Frank will act as an adviser on some cases it's clear not even he believes that.

Braugher is magnificent in ways we've never seen before. In four seasons he's always been the monarch of all he surveys and now everything he's worked for has chained him to his desk. Frank is as arrogant as possible when Gee confronts him, saying he's earned the right to be here after thirteen years. Al is as sanguine as before, making it very clear that Frank has pissed a lot of people in his career (and the ones we've seen onscreen don't even come close to covering the ones he must have gotten before this) and repeated that the department wants him in evidence control or out altogether. He makes it clear that he has 'burned all his IOUs' with Frank.

The thing is Al's not wrong. We see Frank struggle to remember names, sweat when he's walking upstairs, he can't remember words like Xerox or how to spell pizza. His memory is a mess as we see in a horrible moment when he has to deal with the phone during a hostage crisis, is distracted for the lunch order, and can't remember who he's talking to when he gets back to the phone.

 

With everything going on its almost a relief when the phone starts ringing with murders. Bayliss and Munch go to the home of Francine Uba, a woman who was shot dead in her home while making breakfast. The witness to the crime is a pig named Angie and notably missing is son Jerry.

Considering how things will play out in the final season its interesting to watch Munch and Bayliss' interactions as partners. After Bayliss smacks Munch down for being a jerk, the two of them investigate. Munch takes the situation no more seriously then with his other partners: when he finds the pig and sees her making breakfast he says: "I think we found our motive. Bacon." Bayliss is playing straight man for once, and its interesting to see him now playing the voice of solemnity. This will be a breakthrough season for Kyle Secor. We are reminded of how he wasn't sure he'd be a great detective without Frank and the first half of the season he seems determined to prove.

And while Frank is being told the new rules Kellerman comes running in and tells Gee there's a hostage situation at a middle school with two dead and the hostage taker barricading himself in. In keeping with what is more old school Homicide Kellerman and the squad ride off, just as Bayliss and Munch come back to the squad, talking about Brody and the  pig, unaware of the crisis unfolding – and unaware Frank is back.

It is keeping with how Homicide works that the episode makes it clear immediately about the two's relationship. Bayliss immediately runs to Frank, tries to embrace him and Frank immediately pushes him away.  Bayliss tries everything he can to be considerate and comforting to Frank and Frank just resents it. He pushes away the chair Tim bought for him ("I don't want a present', he stutters out) and resents every attempt Tim does to try and show he gives a damn. Frank wants to talk about the job and Tim tries to ply him off.

Then Munch reaches new levels of meanness when he says that they're working this case and "we've got this really uncooperative witness and we could use your expertise. He tells him to call Animal Control and talk to Angie. You still walk on water, don't you Frank?" This is incredibly mean but it's telling that when Bayliss finally tells his partner Angie's a pig he takes it out on Bayliss.

It's only at the end of Frank's first shift that we get to the core of it. Munch tells Frank he called him fifty times, sent flowers and called his wife – and Frank never returned one call. We saw how shocked he was when Frank went down and how much it hurt him. Frank then sheepishly admits he knew but that he didn't think it was that important to him. For the briefest of moments Munch has the moral high ground.

The hostage situation that unfolds was considered unrealistic in 1996 but it is yet another moment from the show that is eerily prescient in the era of mass shootings in public schools. Indeed the ultimate body count is strikingly low when its all said and done: most of us would love for a school shooting to happen and only four people be dead  by the end of the episode in the entire building. And it plays out like it would under real-life circumstances: QRT is called out first and given priority as 'a red ball'. Homicide essentially has to stand around being bystanders, trying to get information. It's actually interesting watching this episode in regard to Jaspers. Usually he's had to answer to the detectives and Giardello and now for once Jaspers runs the show. It's a great performance for Gary D'Addario, particularly as it demonstrates that these people are good at their jobs and can do things well when left to their own devices. Perhaps Homicide's arrogance at being the best of the best is overstated.

And we also get a sense at the multiple sides of Bonfather. We've seen him in crises before and they usually bring out the worst in him, so its refreshing to see him take a position and stick with it, at least in this episode. He makes it clear QRT is there to run the show and that the detectives are there to observe when the investigation is over. It's clear that they're not used to being this powerless at what is a crime scene and it clearly unnerves all of them, particularly Giardello.

The interviews take on an atmosphere that is all-too familiar today but in 1996 was still relatively rare. And its demonstrated when Kellerman interviews a young girl while Brodie is filming. The girl's clearly in shock and when she hears this is a movie she reacts: "This isn't really happening. This isn't real." It's done in the familiar rapid-cut we've become used to on the show but we're not allowed escapism because then she turns to a friend being wheeled away on an ambulance and says she can get up. When she turns around and says: "You lied to me," it breaks your heart even in a way that should those who've seen these things play out countless times in real life.

The common theme in both Frank's return and the hostage storyline is impatience. Frank wants to get back to what he does but the rules won't let him and his partner is willing to play by them. So much of his rage is based in frustration which he takes out on those who care for him – Al, Tim, and Mary. At the end of the episode he goes to the range to take target practice and the fact he couldn't even come close to the bullseye is a visual symbol of how off-center he is.

And outside the school the detectives are paralyzed and unable to do their jobs. But neither is QRT or the negotiator. At the end of the episode he makes his first demand: he wants beer. Now the squad is forced to wait and see what will happen and they have no control over what this man – who as we see in the final moments has already killed four people – will do next.

And of course we the viewer are left at home waiting to see what happens next week in a state of tension. We know that one of the stories will be resolved but the larger issues won't even come close.

 

 

NOTES FROM THE BOARD

 

Inconsistencies: Its been at least three months between the fourth season finale and today according to everybody in the unit. But according to the board there have been almost no murders between May and September. The last recording murder in Season 4 was 152 and the first murder of Season 5 is 160.  A later shot of the board will show there have been a few murders but nowhere near as many between the end of Season 3 and Season 4.  So either people decided to stop killing each other  out of respective for the departments issues during the summer of 1996 in Baltimore or this is a massive continuity error. (It's the latter; the next two seasons will remember this mistake.)

As you might have noticed the opening credits are much different from the first four seasons, taking a somewhat more music video style montage. This was not admired by viewers at the time. I had no problem with it then or now.

Pembleton's return is in fact based on a real-life police board decision. In a landmark decision by the Baltimore pension hearing board, the department concluded that if an officer was capable of answering phones and performing a minimal level of administrative work, that was enough for the officer to return to work.

It was the 1990s: In his last remark to Al before leaving Gaffney says that with Russert leaving for Paris and Pembleton's stroke "it's like an episode of Nash Bridges in here." This was actually a thorn in Fontana and everyone's side. In the spring of 1996 the Don Johnson-Cheech Marin cop show Nash Bridges premiered at Friday at 10 PM and would regularly beat Homicide in the ratings for the remainder of that show's airing on the run. At best a lightweight procedural if it is remembered today it is because two of the most noted showrunners in TV history worked there: Shawn Ryan, who after he left it would create the groundbreaking drama The Shield and Carlton Cuse, who would be one of the co-creators of Lost.

Detective Munch: Aside from the snideness he directs towards Frank in general there are quite a few Munch zingers. My personal favorite comes from when Howard asks him if he wants a cup of coffee:

Munch: That's the first time in weeks, no months, a woman has asked about my needs.

Howard: The offer was coffee, not a vestal virgin,

Munch: More's the pity.

Of course he's out of the squad by the time Howard comes back with his coffee.

Hey Isn't That… As another tribute to the much missed Baltimore Colts one of Uba's neighbors is played by Art Donovan, who was one of their defensive tackles, first in 1950 and then from 1953-1961. During this period he led the Colts to two back to back championships in those days before the Super Bowl. He actually had multiple TV late night appearances, appearing on David Letterman ten times, and guest starring on the Adventures of Pete & Pete  as a football coach. He passed away in 2013 at the age of 89.

The story of Megan Russert getting pregnant and running off with a French diplomat isn't that far removed from reality. Hoffman was pregnant and ran off with her former co-star (and onscreen lover) Daniel Baldwin at the end of the 1996 season. We'll see and hear from her again but its worth noting what she's been up too in the aftermath of her departure.

After departing Homicide she would take on the role of Cecile Malone, the wife of a network executive on Showtime's Beggars and Choosers, one of their first real entries into prestige television. The show would run from 1999-2000. She would appear in The Practice, The Division and role of Dr. Renee Dunseith on Providence. She had a recurring role as Lt. Maryann Cavendish between 20022 and 2004 and has acted in almost every series from Grey's Anatomy to Criminal Minds to Alpha. She had a recurring role as Clarissa Stein in the Arrow-verse. Her last major role was in the Lifetime movie My Mother The Madam. No comment.

My Predictions (And Hopes) For the 2026 Golden Globes For TV

 

On Sunday night the Golden Globes will give their annual awards. And there is one question on everybody's mind this year…

How many times will someone say: "Thank you, Sal Saperstein!"

No I'm kidding. The real question is: will the Golden Globes be nearly as entertaining as they appeared to be in the episode on this past season of The Studio?

All right I'm having way too much fun with this joke. But come on considering how brilliant that particular episode was of The Studio and how many of the nominees for television this year did cameos in The Studio you have to wonder how many of the stars will be thinking about going forward.

In truth Nikki Glaser was masterful when she hosted the Golden Globes last year and earned the right to see how well she can top herself the second time around.  And as someone who has always considered the TV awards the Golden Globes did incredible, even under the controversial leadership of the now defunct Hollywood Foreign Press Association, I am still trying to figure out how they will do under the third year of their new brand and leadership when it comes to television.

In 2024, even though they were supposed to take place after the Emmys rather then before, they pretty ended up mirroring how it went award for award that year with the sole exception of Elizabeth Debicki winning for The Crown – and she went on to win it the following fall. Last year, it was a blend of the old when it came to drama as Shogun dominated, a mix of new and familiar with comedy and when it came to Limited Series they pretty much split the difference.

So what will happen in 2026? Here's what I am predicting, keeping in mind the Globes has always demonstrated the art of following its own drum.

 

OUTSTANDING DRAMA

It's worth noting its usually the series that has the most nominations that wins in this category and this year it's The White Lotus which has six nominations. Furthermore The White Lotus has won at the Golden Globes in the category Best Limited Series so it does have a history of success. Considering HBO's spectacular track record with the Golden Globes from Sixt Feet Under and The Sopranos to Succession and House of The Dragon, it could very well pull it off.

That said, I'm relatively sure that the Globes will follow the Emmys in this category and give its grand prize to The Pitt, which while it may be a streaming show is still under the HBO bandwidth.

Should Win: The Pitt.

Will Win: The White Lotus/The Pitt

 

OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTOR IN A DRAMA

This one is a no-brainer. Noah Wylie has already won the Emmy and the Critics' Choice Award and he's more than due a win at this awards show. Expect him to continue his grand sweep of every award between here and the SAG. (I know if Adam Scott won, he'd almost certainly thank Sal Saperstein. But this is real life.)

Should Win/Will Win: Wylie

 

OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTRESS IN A DRAMA

All right. Theoretically Seehorn should be the favorite having won at the Critics' Choice Awards this past Sunday. And it is true the two groups have correlated a lot – except last year when Anna Sawai won the Golden Globe and Kathy Bates won the Critics' Choice Award.

I think Seehorn will pull off because, with the exception of Helen Mirren, this is the same field she defeated at the Critics Choice Awards. But don't rule out a win for Kathy Bates who is overdue. Though honestly there are no bad choices among the nominees.

Should Win: Bates.

Will Win: Seehorn (?)

 

BEST COMEDY SERIES

Again Only Murders in the Building is the most nominated show but this is an easy one. The Studio takes this in a walk. Its winning at the Golden Globes may be more meta than any award show in history since Maggie Smith won an Oscar for playing an Oscar nominated actress in California Suite.

Should Win/Will Win: The Studio.

 

BEST ACTOR IN A COMEDY SERIES

Jeremy Allan White won last year to make it three in a row in this category. That award took the most heat last year and now that more and more people are turning on the idea that The Bear is a comedy, its unlikely it will be four in a row.

I'd personally like to see Adam Brody prevail in this category because he should have won last year. But I have no problem with Rogen collecting another trophy, particularly as the only one he can win.

Should Win: Brody.

Will Win: Rogen.

 

BEST ACTRESS IN A COMEDY SERIES

Much as I think its well past time Kristen Bell won something from the Golden Globes and I would love to see Natasha Lyonne get something for her work in the now cancelled Poker Face we are all aware who's going to win and we're all fine with it. Jean Smart has won twice in this category, one short of the number of Season Hacks was on the air (she lost to Quinta Brunson in 2023 no argument) and she's absolutely deserving to win a third. The only question is, will she thank Sal Saperstein at the end of her speech like she did at the Golden Globes on the show?

Should Win/Will Win: Smart.

 

OUTSTANDING LIMITED SERIES

Much as I'd rather see Dying for Sex or All Her Fault win here I know the award is going to go to Adolescence. Am I okay with it? No. But I'm going to start watching Beast in Me and The Girlfriend to see which of them will contend for Emmys next year, along with All Her Fault.

Should Win: All Her Fault.

Will Win: Adolescence.

 

OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTOR IN A LIMITED SERIES/TV MOVIE

Graham is the only nominee I've seen so far and can talk about with confidence. I will be pulling for Rhys and knowing Graham will win.

Should Win: Rhys.

Will Win Graham.

 

OUTSTANDING LEAD ACTRESS IN A LIMITED SERIES/TV MOVIE

All right this has a decent group of nominees. My personal favorites would be either Sarah Snook or Amanda Seyfried for her work in Long Bright River.  Thing is unlike the Critics Choice Awards the Golden Globes has looked more to the past when it comes to winners in this category then the future and I'm just not sure either of these performances have enough momentum.

I think the Golden Globes will go with Michelle Williams for her work in Dying For Sex. She's always had a longer history of success with them, stretching back to her win for My Week With Marilyn in 2012. I'll give her the barest of edges.

Should Win: Snook/Seyfried.

Will Win: Williams.

 

OUTSTANDING TV SUPPORTING ACTOR

This one might not go as expect because as you can see Owen Cooper is up against Tramell Tillman, both of whom have won in the Emmys and the Critics' Choice Awards.

Personally I'd love to see Walton Goggins win here for his spectacular work in The White Lotus. But I'm giving the barest of edges to Cooper. Remember there have been surprising in these categories before.

Should Win: Goggins.

Will Win: Cooper.

 

OUTSTANDING TV SUPPORTING ACTRESS

The Critics Choice won't be as much in play as neither Katherine LaNasa nor Janelle James is here. We do, however, have two of the other Emmy winners in this category this past year Hannah Einbinder for Hacks and Erin Doherty for Adolescence.

I'm less sure here that the Critics Choice will go along with the usual suspects. Personally I would love to see Carrie Coon or Parker Posey win for their work in The White Lotus – and Jennifer Coolidge did win in this category once. I think it will go to Coon or Einbinder rather than Doherty.

Should Win: Coon.

Will Win: Einbinder (but they're all good choices).

 

I'll be back on Monday with my comparison between how the Golden Globes played out as to whether it was as funny as on The Studio – I mean, my reactions to the winners in this category.

2026 Jeopardy Champions Wild Card Recap, Part 1: The Quarterfinals

 

 

We are closing in on to the start of the 2026 Tournament of Champions. Next Friday the final spot will have been determined with the winner of Champions Wildcard.

For those who need reminders Champions Wildcard is an old style Jeopardy tournament. This week we will deal with five quarterfinal games. The winners will automatically move on to the semifinals but there are four spots for high scores – wild card spots for a Wildcard tournament.

So this article will deal with the recap of the quarterfinal matches.

 

January 5^th

Dargan Ware vs. Bill McKinney vs. Stella Trout

 

The Jeopardy round had a lot of incorrect responses and much of it spent with Stella and Bill in the red. Stella managed to get to $1400 and found the Daily Double in THE BEST & THE BRIGHTEST with half of Dargan's total at the time. She bet everything:

"Founded in 1946 as a motel chain, this now-international hotel brand is appropriately headquartered in Arizona."

It would have helped to remember the category and Stella couldn't (nor could I) It was Best Western. Back to zero she went

She rebounded and by the end of the Jeopardy everyone was on the side of positive. Dargan led with $5400 to Bill's $2000 and Stella's $1400.

Stella turned the tables in Double Jeopardy almost immediately finding both Daily Doubles. The first was on the first clue she picked in THE VIKINGS. She wagered the $2000 she could:

"The first evidence of European presence in America is an 11^th century Viking settlement at L'Anse aux Meadows on this island." She figured out it was Newfoundland and went into second place. Dargan then lost $1200 in the A FLUVIAL CATEGORY and then on the next clue she picked she found the other Daily Double in LITERARY BEGINNINGS. For the third time she bet everything she could and again it worked:

"Jorge Louis Borges' story collection 'A Universal History of Infamy' has been called the first book in this literary genre.' It took her a moment and she came up with magical realism. This put her at $6800 and in the lead for the first time.

 Dargan then began to struggle in Double Jeopardy: he gave just four correct responses and five incorrect ones in that round, finishing with $2600.  Stella finished Double Jeopardy with a total of 20 correct responses and five incorrect ones (only two in the Double Jeopardy round) to finish in the lead with $16,000. Bill finished with $13,200.

The Final Jeopardy category was SCIENCE.  "Important in developing vaccines against TB, they were domesticated as a food source in the Andes region around 5000 B.C."  

Dargan wrote down: "What are llamas?" That was incorrect but he lost just $400, leaving him with $2200.

Bill wrote down: "What are guinea pigs?" and then crossed it out. (He joked with Ken: "I was trying to underline it.) He only lost $1000, leaving him with $12,200.

That left Stella. She wrote down: "What are guinea pigs?" and did not cross it out, which was good because that was the correct response. She was already in the lead and her wager of $10,401 put her at $26,401 as she became an automatic semifinalist.

Bill will have to see if his $12,200 will be good enough for a wild card spot. Dargan is not looking in great shape.

Personal note: This was not a great game for me. At one point in the Jeopardy round I was at -$2400 and I was lucky to be at $3600 by the time the round ended. I finished with $14,600 but I completely misread Final Jeopardy. I wrote down: "What is nicotine?" which doesn't make a lick of sense compared to the actual response.

 

 

January 6^th

 Geoff Barnes vs Dave Bond vs Michelle Tsai

 

Michelle, freshly minted a Second Chance Winner, managed to get off to a fast start when she found the Daily Double in the Jeopardy round in SHAKESPEARE GOES WILD. Already in the lead with $2000 she bet everything:

"This king's horses 'turned wild in nature, broke their stalls…'tis said they eat each other' after his murder by MacBeth." She knew it was Duncan and doubled her score to $4000. She maintained her lead throughout the Jeopardy round though Dave never let her rest. She finished with $7200 to his $6200 with Geoff trailing with $1600.

In Double Jeopardy both Geoff and Dave made a couple of moves. Michelle got to the first Daily Double with $10,000 but she was now trailing Dave. She bet $2000 to try and get the lead back in DISEASES:

"2025 saw and outbreak in New York of this form of pneumonia first identified in 1976." Michelle said she was glad she only bet $2000 as she had no idea it was Legionnaire's disease. She dropped to $8000.

She got up to $10,800 and found the other Daily Double in LINGUISTICS. For the third straight time she bet $2000 but it didn't go better than the last one though this was even tougher than the previous one.

"If you see 'PIE' as part of the etymology of a word, it stands for this reconstructed parent language." She had no idea that it was Proto-Indo-European (I'm not sure I'd ever heard of that term.)

She rebuilt yet again and by the end of Double Jeopardy was in the lead with $16,000 having given 23 correct response and four incorrect ones (two of them were the Daily Doubles in Double Jeopardy) Both Dave and Geoff had played superbly and finished with impressive scores themselves: $11,800 for Dave, $8800 for Geoff.

The Final Jeopardy category is one I have no memory of being used before: TYPOGRAPHY. The clue was similarly baffling:

Inspired by Port Authority bus terminal signage, it was adopted as a font by NYU & the Tribeca Film Festival.

Geoff's response was revealed first. "What is Helvetica?" It was incorrect. He went big and wagered $8000, leaving him with $800.

Next was Dave. "What is Arial?" That was also incorrect. He was conservative in his betting wagering only $1800. This left him with $10,000.

Michelle couldn't come up with anything. The correct response was: "What is Gotham?" (I got it right but it was a pure guess; I wasn't even sure it was a font.) Michelle also bet carefully, wagering $1602. That left her with $14,398 and that was enough to make her an automatic semifinalist. Dave's $10,000 might well be enough for a wild card spot; he's now second on the list of high scores.

 

January 7^th

Jason Singer vs Harvey Silkowitz vs Cameron Berry

 

Cameron got off to a fast start in the Jeopardy round and had a considerable lead by the time Jason found the Daily Double in ITS GOVERNMENT POLICY. He wagered $1500 of his $2000:

"This U.S. policy of using implied forced in foreign relations is also known as the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine." Jason struggled before guessing: "What is strength through peace?" It was the Big Stick policy, based on Teddy Roosevelt's famous maxim. Cameron finished the round with $8200 to Harvey's $3000 and Jason's $1500.

Cameron got to the first Daily Double in Double Jeopardy early in THEIR OWN MUSEUM. However he cautiously bet just $1000 a decision he instantly regretted:

"Museums in Toledo, Spain and on Crete celebrate the works of this famous artist." He knew it was El Greco and moved up to $10,800.

Harvey got the next clue right. Both of the next clues he selected were not answered which meant he found the other Daily Double in MEMOIRS. With $3800 to risk, he bet $2000:

"Presumably rejected 'Olaf Me," actor Josh's memoir has this title, punning on our national motto." Harvey admitted he had no idea and one can hardly blame him for not coming up with In Gad We Trust.

He managed a remarkable comeback responding correctly on 17 correct responses and only three incorrect ones. Cameron managed 22 correct responses and 3 incorrect ones but two of them in Double Jeopardy cost him $3600. That meant going into Final Jeopardy Harvey had the thinnest of leads with $13,000 to Cameron's $12,800 while Jason trailed with $3900.

The Final Jeopardy category was LITERATURE. "In a 21^st century Pulitzer Prize winner, this character introduced in an 1876 work is biracial." All of them were thinking of the correct 21^st century work (as was I) but they got the wrong reference.

Jason wrote down: "Who is James?" That was incorrect. He lost everything he had.

Cameron wrote down: "Who is Jim?" That had been ruled incorrect but Cameron bet just $201, leaving him with $12,599.

It came down to Harvey. He also wrote down Jim. They were all thinking of Percival Everett's book James but in that book Huck Finn was biracial. It came down to wagers and Harvey bet just $2. That left him with $12,998 and he hung on for a much deserved victory. Cameron's $12,599 moves him into first position for a wild card and officially eliminates Geoff from contention for the last spot.

January 8^th

Jonathan Hugendubler vs Vickie Tavola vs Pete Johnston

 

Pete found the Daily Double in the Jeopardy round on the very first clue, it went against him and he lost the $1000 he bet. He managed to rebound from this while Jonathan started strong and maintained. Vickie was up and down in the Jeopardy round and was lucky to finish at $800, $3000 behind Pete, $4000 behind Jonathan.

In Double Jeopardy Vickie managed to close the gap almost immediately when she found the first Daily Double in LET'S RADIOCARBON DATE. She had $2400, exactly half Jonathan's total so it made sense to be everything:

"Found in Portugal, the skeleton of a love child between a Homo sapiens and this species has been dated at 27,000+ years old. She knew it was a Neanderthal and tied for the lead.

The rest of the game was a very tight one as all three players made their share of mistakes on expensive clues. As a result when Pete found the other Daily Double in BROADWAY WRITING TEAMS he was in third with $7800 to Vickie's $8000 and Jonathan's $8400.

He made it clear it wasn't his category so he just bet $1000:

"John Kander and Fred Ebb knew how to open a show with, 'All That Jazz' and this language-lesson number that begins Cabaret." He came up with Willkommen and went into the lead. He just managed to hold it the rest of the round but it was a near thing as he finished with $10,800 to Jonathan and Vickie's $9200 apiece.

The Final Jeopardy category was BIBLICAL ART. "3 of Michelangelo's panels on the Sistine Chapel ceiling deal with him, including his 'drunkenness' & 'sacrifice'.

Jonathan's response was revealed first: "What is Noah?" As Ken told us the third panel is called The Deluge, so Noah was correct. He bet everything, putting him in the lead with $18,400.

Next came Vickie. She wrote down: "What is Noah?" She wagered $4400 putting her at $13,600.

It was all on Pete. His response was: "Who is Abraham?" (The sacrifice part make sense it was better than my guess of Peter.) It cost him $7601, leaving him $3199. Jonathan had come from behind yet again and this time he became an automatic semifinalist.

With her total Vickie has locked down her spot as a wild card semifinalist with the highest total of non-winners so far. Also guaranteed a spot is Cameron Berry who's $12,599 is the second highest total among non-winners. For Pete Johnston his Second Chance run ends here: while his total is the fifth highest score among non-winners that has automatically eliminated him.

 

January 9^th

James Corson vs. Ryan Sharpe vs Ian Morrison

 

Ian would find the Daily Double early in the Jeopardy round and lose $1000. Ryan would seize the lead early and manage to maintain it and hold it in the Jeopardy round but all three players were superb. Ryan finished with $6400, James with $4200 and Ian with $3600.

In Double Jeopardy Ryan would find both Daily Doubles and double down on his wagering practices from the Second Chance Tournament, a process that reminds recent viewers of James Holzhauer's practices in Final Jeopardy and long-time viewers of another Jeopardy great named Ryan – Holznagel – who had a similar practice when it came to betting in them. In either case it was understandably unsettling to Ken who has yet to be on the other side of it the way Alex occasionally was.

The first occasion came early when Ryan already in the lead with $9600 bet $6174. As Alex might say: "That makes sense. But only to me."

"Named for a duke, this nearly 700-mile long river rises in Kentucky, flows through Tennessee, then back into Kentucky." Ryan knew it was the Cumberland and now had an even $15,774.

Not long after Ryan found the other Daily Double in THEY CALL ME MELLOW YELLOW. He chose to wager the perfectly round sum of $2048:

"At the turn of the 20^th century, Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and this publishers New York Journal spread lurid yellow journalism." He knew it was Hearst and now had $21,022 in front of him.

Ryan performed perfectly: 22 correct responses and not a single incorrect one. It is to the credit of James in particular that he never gave up and almost stopped him from getting a runaway but it wasn't quite enough. Ryan finished with $24,222 to James' $11,000 and Ian's $8800. Ryan had runaway with the game but the wild card spots were still important.

The Final Jeopardy category was NOTABLE AMERICANS. "Known in Mexican history as the sale of the Mesilla valley, the 30,000 square mile deal was negotiated by this U.S. diplomat."

Ian's response was revealed first: "Who is Gadsden?" That was correct. James Gadsden negotiated the Gadsden purchase that got us Southern Arizona and New Mexico." Ian bet everything to put him at $17,600.

James wrote down: "who is Gasden?", crossed it out and then wrote Gadsen?" Under the rules of Jeopardy he was incorrect either way. To save the trouble of writing in, normally Jeopardy accepts alternate spellings but in this case Gadsden refers to a different individual and pronunciation that either of James responses. (I wrote down Gadsen and I docked myself at home.) It was unfortunate and it cost him everything.

Ryan wrote down: "Who was Gadsden?" He bet another $1729 to finish with a nice round $25,951 and make him an automatic semi-finalist.

And now here is the complete record of who we will see next week, along with their record on Jeopardy:

 

Stella Trout, one game winner

Michelle Tsai, winner of the Week 2 Second Chance

Harvey Silkowitz, one game winner

Jonathan Hugendubler, two game winner

Two of three Second Chance Winners of this past postseason have qualified. Now here are the four wild card spots:

Cameron Berry, one game winner

Bill McKinney, a three game winner.

Vickie Talvola, a one game winner

And joining them with the highest score of all runners up:

Ian Morrison, a one game winner.

 

The story continues.

Jonathan's quest to face off against the man he dethroned against Scott Riccardi continues. Both Ryan Sharpe and Ian Morrison will have a chance for a rematch against Paolo Pasco. Harvey Silkowitz might well face off against Laura Faddah, who he dethroned.

Cameron will be trying to face off Alex DeFrank who he dethroned and Josh Weikert who beat him. Vickie Talvola will wait to see if Steven Olson who defeated him in a rout will be waiting for her. Bill McKinney will be trying to earn the spot that so many three game winners managed to get in ahead of him on. Stella Trout and Michelle Tsai have no grudges anybody in their trek here which makes them the 'nice ones' in this tournament, so to speak. (Interestingly all three female competitors in Champions Wild Card managed to advance.)

I'll  be back on Wednesday to report on the results of the semi-finals. Anything can happen and a lot already has.