Jeopardy Masters 2026 Quarterfinal Recap Conclusion

 

Wednesday September 2^nd

Quarterfinals Conclusion

 

Match 1

Paolo Pasco vs. Juveria Zaheer vs. Andrew He

Paolo had nothing to fear in this match; regardless of the outcome he was headed to the semi-finals against Victoria and Yogesh.

But for Juveria and Andrew it was a very different story. Only if either one of them managed a victory did they have a chance of going on to the semi-finals. Even then things would have to fall a certain way.

If Andrew won, Juveria would be eliminated and he would have to wait and see how events played out in the second match. If Juveria prevailed, Andrew would be eliminated and if Long finished third outright she would return to the semifinals automatically. If Long finished in second, she would be in a similar position as Andrew would be.  Juveria had been in this exact position last year and she'd made it work for her against Matt Amodio and Roger Craig. Would her luck fall the same this year?

The Jeopardy round demonstrated upfront how much of a fight this would be. All three players were close throughout the round and Paolo managed to gain an edge when he found the Daily Double fairly late. By that point Andrew had a slight lead with 4200 points to Paolo's 3800. Paolo risked 2500 points in JOBS:

Cremona, Italy has a long history with this job of stringed instruments and not just the one its name is derived from.

Paolo's knowledge of crosswords might have helped here: "What is a luthier?" Which put him in the lead with 6300 points. He finished the Jeopardy round with a hair's lead over Andrew: 7100 points to Andrew's 6600. Juveria was in excellent shape with 3600.

Juveria came out swinging in Double Jeopardy as she had too. She found the Daily Doubles on back-to-back clues. Consider if she bet everything she would move into the lead that is what she did in I NEED SOME HEIR:

To thwart rival claims against the Ottoman throne, potential heirs were imprisoned, often for decades, inside this imperial palace.

Pause. "What is Topkapi?" And before we could get some air she found the next Daily Double in FROM THE LATIN. This time she was more cautious and bet 2200 points:

An air of haughtiness is part of the demeanor called this, from Latin for 'eyebrow'.

No pause this time. "What is supercilious?" She was now at 9400 points. But there was a lot of gain left and all three Masters were living up to their name. The lead kept going back and forth between all three players throughout Double Jeopardy and by the time it was over Paolo had a very narrow margin 15,100 points to Andrew's 13,800 and Juveria's 12,200.

With so much at stake for two of the three players both the category and wagering were all important. The Final Jeopardy category was WORLD TRANSPORTATION. The clue that decided the fate of one of the Masters was:

China's Big 3 airlines are Air China, based in Beijing, China Eastern, headquartered in Shanghai; and China Northern, based here.

Juveria's response was revealed first. What is Guangzhou?" The big industrial and commercial center of      Southern China was correct.  She wagered 301, putting her at 12,201 points.

Next was Andrew. He also had Guangzhou. He was cautious as well betting 1500 points but that put him into the lead with 15,300.

It was on Paolo who struggled with the clue and couldn't come up with it. He was also cautious, betting 1299 points, leaving him with 13,801 and Andrew He came up with his first victory in this year's Masters when he needed it the most. (I wrote down: "What is Nanking?"

 

Interviews: Andrew discussed how he was working on a new invention for his 3-year old son. He bought a bootlegged 'Game Boy-Esque thing' (his words) that while way worse then a first generation iPod but it does play Frog and Toad and A.A. Milne poems. Juveria discussed her third great love after Jeopardy and her family, the Toronto Blue Jays. She discussed 2025 (which she knew as Ken as a Mariners fan had to be suffering from) and how after every World Series game Juveria was sacrificing her Masters appearances to the finals, semis and eventually wondering if she would sacrifice friends and family. (Any sports fan completely gets this.) Paolo remarked how his mother and father keep sending him emails for things about Jeopardy Masters which he keeps reading because he knows he doesn't want to get a clue wrong that his mother highlighted.  To be clear a clue his father texted him on the World Cup had earned him a thousand points in this game so hard to argue it didn't pay off.

 

 

Andrew came through in the clutch and with his 3 match points he did what he had to do. But for Juveria the Masters came to an end here and she would leave with the sixth place prize and another $50,000. It was a defeat that had no disgrace attached to it given how hard fought this match was. Andrew would have to wait until the second game was over to see what his fate was.

 

Match 2

Victoria Groce vs Yogesh Raut vs Long Nguyen

Victoria and Yogesh were returning to the semi-finals for the third consecutive Masters no matter what the results of this game. But with Andrew's victory Long needed to either win or place to guarantee his spot in the semi-finals. If he were to lose he would be forced to face off with Andrew in a tie breaker.

Victoria got off to a lead early and found the Daily Double in the category WORDS THAT SHOULD RHYME. She was very wary of it and only bet 400 of her 5400 points.

Another name for the Wisent and Azkaban for one.

She figured it out: "What are bison and prison?"

All three players would give a correct response to all thirty clues. (There were some mistakes.) At the end of the round Victoria had 11,000 points to Yogesh's 4000 points and Long's 2000.

Long came out swinging in Double Jeopardy when he found the Daily Double in the category CITIES WITH THE SAME FIRST & LAST LETTER. He bet the 2000 points he had to:

South of Moscow, this city has name on the largest tank battle of World War II.

I have no idea how he came up with this. "What is Kursk?"

From then on Victoria was dominant practically for the rest of the round. She had 25,000 points and a huge lead when she found the other Daily Double in BATHROOM CULTURE. She seemed to like the category and bet 5000 points:

A bathroom mural in New York City's LGBT community was designed by this graffiti artist from Pennsylvania, who died of AIDS complications.

As a native of Pittsburgh she knew this one: "Who is Keith Haring?"

While Victoria had locked up the game second place was very relevant and the question was whether Yogesh, who struggled in this round, could get close enough to Long to keep him from locking it up. He did, finishing with 3600 points to Long's 4000. Victoria had it locked up with 29,600 points.

The last Final Jeopardy of the quarterfinals dealt with WORDS IN THE U.S CONSTITUTION.  The clue was: Coming immediately after 'nor', it's the first adjective in Section 1 of the 13^th Amendment.

Yogesh's response was revealed first. "What is involuntary?" Like he, he remembered that the amendment abolishing slavery begins. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude. He bet everything putting him at 7200 points.

Long, however, wrote down: "What is free?" He had the right idea of the amendment but the wrong adjective. He bet 398, which left him 3602. Either way Yogesh would have prevailed.

Victoria, interestingly, also thought it was free but it was irrelevant. It cost her 4967 but she had won her fifth game in Jeopardy Masters. Yogesh got one victory point and Long got none.

It did come down to the relevant tiebreaker for correct responses. And where it hadn't worked for Andrew in 2023, it paid off for him in 2026 as he managed a spectacularly recovery to move on fourth place.

For Long he had no more to be sorry for than Juveria did as he left in fifth place with $75,000 and like Juveria, more then proving himself worthy of the title Jeopardy Master.

 

Interviews: Long mentioned that he knew Yogesh from online trivia competitions as well and the first time they met, he was leading in one competition by triple digits and Yogesh ended up beating him 510 to 220. Yogesh was just as cordial to Long as Yogesh had related the parable of the bear. "You don't have to be faster than the bear, just faster then the slowest creature the bear is chasing.' Long then asked: "Yeah but what you do if two bears are after and you're by yourself?" (Which was kind of where Long was at that point.) Victoria then said that once while as a teacher she used Jeopardy think music to restore order for her classrooms. She wasn't sure it made them more orderly but it made them more alert. (Accurate.)

FINAL QUARTERFINAL LEADERBOARD

VICTORIA GROCE – 15 MATCH POINTS

YOGESH RAUT – 12 MATCH POINTS

PAOLO PASCO – 8 MATCH POINTS

ANDREW HE – 5 MATCH POINTS

LONG NGUYEN – 5 MATCH POINTS (ELIMINATED AFTER TIEBREAKER)

JUVERIA ZAHEER – 3 MATCH POINTS (ELIMINATED)

 

So for the third straight year Victoria and Yogesh are headed to the semi-finals. Facing them will be this year's Tournament of Champions winner and a former Jeopardy Master himself. And for what it's worth Andrew seems to have been turning on his A-Game in his last two matches having gotten four of the five match points he needed to go from last on the leaderboard to qualifying.

The semi-finals will be Thursday and Friday and I will be back this weekend with the official results.  The board is wiped clean and anything can and will happen in the semi-finals. Stay tuned.

My Predictions for the 2026 Emmys,Week 3, Part 3: Outstanding Lead Actress in a Limited Series/TV Movie

 

First of all for this category I will actually be considering TV Movie because one of the nominees is the star of one. With Remarkably Bright Creatures a near shoo-in to win in the category Best TV Movie Sally Field will be a formidable contender as the first actress to earn in a spot in this category in over a decade.

Second this is a formidable category and while it has a frontrunner I believe it is far more wide-open then the current odds allow. I've seen all four performances in the Limited Series categories and they represent some of the most stunning work done by any performers in the last year.

 

Claire Danes, The Beast in Me. For Playing: Aggie Wiggs, an author dealing with multiple traumas trying to find out if her new neighbor is everything the public believes he is. Pro: I've long since stopped thinking I could be astonished by Danes' capability as a performer after her iconic work as Carrie Matheson in Homeland But in her work in Limited Series she continues to push the boundaries of her profession, usually great even when the material rarely serves her (as was the case in her last Emmy nominated role in Fleishman is in Trouble.) Now she takes on the role of Aggie Wiggs a woman whose life has been a disaster since her son was killed in a hit and run and then has to deal with the presence of the literal next door neighbor from hell in Nile Jarvis. Despite her understandable repulsion to him she keeps being drawn into his orbit, first convince he's responsible for the death of someone she hated, then constantly being convinced against her will he's innocent. Danes work as Aggie is a contrast to so many of her previous characters: she is frail, broken and lets her instincts constantly lead her down the wrong path. Yet you can never tear your eyes from her every moment she's on the screen. She was nominated for every acting award since the end of last year and this is another treasure in a seemingly endless list of great performances. Con: Of all the actresses in this category Danes has by far gotten the most recognition from the Emmys with three to this point. As good as she is, it's more certain the Emmys will spread the wealth this year – and there are plenty of equally deserving nominees.

Sally Field, Remarkably Bright Creatures. For Playing: Tova Sullivan an elderly widow who learns of a life-changing discovery while at a night shift at a local aquarium. Pro: It has been a long time since an actress managed to get nominated for her work in a TV movie in this category; it's something Renee Zellweger and Jessica Lange couldn't accomplish last year. But Field's work in what has very quickly become one of the best TV movies in a very long time as a woman who finds her path forward by looking at the path of a giant squid is by far the most humane performance in a category filled with deeply cynical and dark actors. Field managed to prevail in the Astras last month over several more praised performances and it is a tribute to one of the greatest actresses of all time that she never once flinches from the work. Con: No actress has managed to win in this category since Julianne Moore did for Game Change back in 2012 which was an entirely different era for TV and TV movies alike. Overcoming this obstacle seems highly unlikely if not impossible for Field.

Carey Mulligan, Beef (EXPERTS PICK). For Playing: Lindsay, a woman trapped in a failing marriage after a fight brings everything to the surface. Like Oscar Isaac Mulligan is well past deserving some kind of big prize. She has been one of our most formidable performers since she made her debut in An Education back in 2009. Playing girls, then women, who appeared frail but who often had a steeliness you underestimated at your peril she played a woman who had come from money, spent all of her time and energy helping boost her husband and now had nothing to show for it but a failing marriage. The collapse she went through with the loss of her dog Burberry was the straw that broke the back of her marriage. She spent the next several months trying to take revenge on those she thought deserved all while ending up deeper and deeper into loss. That decision would eventually put her into a position that seemed like it would cost her everything. When her husband made the ultimate sacrifice it seemed a triumph – until the denouement revealed she was as fickle as before. It is a haunting, twisted and frequently hysterical performance that has deservedly put her at the frontrunner in this category. Con: When Sally Field prevailed in this category at the Astras it indicated that the support for Mulligan is much softer then some of the other actors and talent. I'm less convinced that she will prevail here then other winners in this category.

Sarah Pidgeon,  Love Story (DARK HORSE). For Playing: Carolyn Bessette, beginning a romance and then marrying the worlds most eligible bachelor – and who is unprepared for what comes with it. Pro: The complete unknown in this category Pidgeon had an even tougher job then Paul Anthony Kelly: to play the woman who married America's most famous bachelor and who comparatively was always a cipher. It is a credit to Pidgeon that she came out by far as the most dynamic member of the couple: the more dominant figure in the initial courtship, incredibly erotic in everything and able to give as well as she took. Watching her energy in the first half of the series was incredible; watching the paparazzi destroy her was heartbreaking, watching the penultima episode when we saw just how much it had broken her and John devastating, and knowing how it ended tragic. I couldn't take my eyes off Pidgeon the moment she first appeared onscreen. This is an actress with a bright future in the industry and I'm glad I saw her first. Con: The Emmys don't have a great history of picking relative unknowns in the lead actor or actress in limited series: I have no memory of it happening in my lifetime. Pidgeon might pull it off but winning is, well, slightly easier then winning the heart of People's Sexiest Man Alive.

Sarah Snook, All Her Fault (MY PICK) For Playing: Marissa Irvine, who after her son is abducted finds herself at the center of a media firestorm and the lie at the center of her marriage. Pro: Snook is one of the few performers in this category with a trophy to her name already, having deservingly prevailed in this category at the Critics Choice Awards last January. It's understandable why. Her work as Marissa, a mother who when she goes to pickup her son is launched into the worst nightmare possible, is one of the most mesmerizing portrayals of grief, betrayal and despair as it is only the start of learning that so much of what she believed her life to be was a complete and utter lie. There is a humanity to Snook's work here that she never really got to display in her Emmy winning work for Succession and as she learned that her husband was never what she thought he was and every aspect of her entire life had been a mythos it was terrifying her as even the recovery of him led to darker and more frightening turns, forcing to make a decision that was so horrific and yet completely understandable. All of the nominees gave incredible performances but I still believe Snook's is the most deserving of a trophy and I'd like to see her win. Con: Snook did win at the Emmys a little less then three years ago. I'd like to see her join Danes as one of the few actresses to win Best Lead Actress in both drama and limited series but I'm just not convinced it'll happen.

 

Prediction: While Mulligan is still the heavy favorite, don't rule out the possibility of one of the Sarah's – most likely Pidgeon – to pull out an upset.

 

Tomorrow I deal with Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Limited Series. And I'm going to give it the dignity that the Emmys itself seems unwilling to do so.

 

 

Jeopardy Masters 2026 Recap: September 1st

 

Match 1

Yogesh Raut vs Juveria Zaheer vs. Andrew He

For both Juveria and Andrew today's match was critical. If Andrew could manage to pull out a victory he would move into fifth place and still have a slim chance of making it into the semi-finals. For Juveria either a win or a second place could theoretically keep her in contention for making it to the semi-finals for the second consecutive year. For Yogesh even a second place finish would officially lock down his competing in the semi-finals for the third consecutive year.

The stakes couldn't have been higher for all three Masters.

Andrew came out swinging  getting an early lead in the Jeopardy round. He was helped immensely when he found the Daily Double in THE BUSINESS WORLD early. He bet the 2200 points he had:

Founded in 1974 and a towering industrial presence, this national oil company says it was 'established to unlock Malaysia's energy potential.'

Andrew responded almost instantly: What is Patronus? After getting to 4400 points he would never seriously be threatened for the lead the rest of the game. He  finished the Jeopardy round with a big lead with 9600 points to  Juveria's  3600 and Yogesh was in third with 1600 points.

Yogesh found the first Daily Double in CODE SWITCHING on his first pick and bet just the 1600 points he had. (He had no idea what the category was about which is understandable.)

Code talker used in World War I were from this Oklahoma-based 'First tribe over the trail of tears' – Navajo code talkers came later.

Yogesh guessed: "Who are the Cherokee?" That was my guess. It was actually the Choctaw. So he was back at zero.

It was a bit before Yogesh found the other Daily Double in URBAN TRADITIONS. Still in third with 2400 points again he bet everything. It worked out better this time:

New Orleans radio station WWOZ keeps track of these ordinal named parades put on by groups like the West Bank Steppers.

He figured it out: "What is second line?"

Despite the massive recovery by Yogesh he could not catch up to Andrew who finished the Jeopardy round with 18,000 points to Yogesh's 12,400 and Juveria's 11,400 in what was by far the most thrilling game in this year's Masters so far.

It came down to Final Jeopardy as it should. The category was COINS.

Coins minted by Constantine I in 327 had these 2 Greek letters, a monogram belonging to one other than the ruler.

All three of them knew the correct letters. (I didn't even have the right alphabet). What are chi and rho? Constantine had converted the Christianity and this was the monogram of Christ. So it came down to wagers.

Juveria went small betting 200 points, putting her at 11,600. Yogesh went big with 10001 putting him at 22,801. And Andrew was conservative betting just 300 points which left him at 18,300 and gave Yogesh a shocking come from behind win.

Yogesh received 3 match points to clinch his place in this year's Masters. Andrew received 1 match point. Juveria received zero.

 

 

Interviews: Andrew talked about the fact that Katie Nolan, who did very well on Celebrity Jeopardy not long ago, said she was a fan of his. Andrew has since gone on her podcast. Apparently before this game Nolan gave Andrew a pep talk which seemed to be working. Juveria talked about all of the numerous friends she's made from every single Jeopardy tournament she's been on in the last few years. She talked about going to a wedding with a corgi from one competitor (asked if the corgi was her date Juveria said "I wish!) and she showed a picture of her in an escape room with her fellow Canadian Jeopardy champions: Mattea Roach and Ray LaLonde were very prominent) where they apparently lost. Yogesh talked about how his UK trivia buddies have printed out images of him that they use as an icon and whoever gets the highest score gets to carry it around. (So Yogesh is a British trivia status symbol now.)

 

Victoria Groce vs. Paolo Pasco vs. Long Nguyen

A victory for either Paolo or Long would essentially guarantee a place in the semi-finals.  For Paolo even a second place finish would essentially achieve the same goal while for Long there was more complicated math involved. Victoria was sitting pretty having won three out of four games with a guaranteed lock on the semi-finals for the third straight year.

All three players were in the red early in the Jeopardy round. For Long it was the sign of how things were to come, he would never finish on the positive. For Paolo he recovered quickly and held the lead most of the way. Victoria got to the Daily Double in CIVICS. Victoria had turned it around and had 1400 points of which she wagered everything:

This type of Latin-named law which punishes people retroactively is prohibited in the Constitution. Victoria knew it instantly: "What is ex post facto?" She doubled her score. She wouldn't be able to catch up to Paolo in the Jeopardy round finishing with 3800 points to his 5200. Long was at -2000 which was actually better compared how much of Double Jeopardy would go for him.

Victoria found the first Daily Double in the category LATIN/ENGLISH OVERLAPS and had just gone into the lead with 5400 points. She decided since they had no idea what the category was about to risk just 200 points. Intelligent woman given what the clue was:

This half-man, half bull appears in the Northern Lights.

She guessed: "What is the Minotaur?" It was a Before and After type clue. The correct response: "What is Minotaur-ora Borealis?" She then immediately went away from that category which is understandable.

Victoria then retook the lead and was at 9600 points when she found the other Daily Double in PROFESSORS. Paolo was still at 5200 points so this time she wagered 4400. Despite knowing what she was getting into, it went no better then the previous Daily Double:

An English Prof at Cornell, he would grasp his own suspenders, lean forward and tell his class:' 'Rule 17: Omit needless words.

Victoria guessed: "Who is Nabokov?" It was one of the Elements of Style of William Strunk, Jr.  Victoria was honest: "I thought about that. Would have said White anyhow (the other co-author)

Victoria recovered and would move into the lead after running the category FOREIGN TV. However she couldn't completely shake Paolo. Long managed the moral victory, once as low as -4800 points he managed to  get the last three clues in DEATH IN VENICE correct to finish at zero. Paolo had 9600 points to Victoria's 18,000 points. Long would not be around for Final Jeopardy.

When he saw the Final Jeopardy category ITALIAN OPERA Paolo couldn't keep a poker face. It didn't go his way but he was in good shape regardless.

In the first scene of this opera the title character is mentioned as he 'whose song rises at night from the gardens.

Paolo wrote down: "Who is Don Giovanni?" That was incorrect he lost everything but a dollar.

Victoria wrote down nothing. (Not even saying hi to Nora) She lost just 401 finishing in first.

The correct response was Il Trovatore which translated to "The troubadour'. I am embarrassed that as someone who has grown up adjacent to opera of all types I wrote down Pagliacci. I take solace in the fact neither Master knew it.

 

 

Interviews: Long mentioned how big a fan his mother was of him and told a story about how she called and said: "I turned on the show. You weren't there." So then he had to explain how TV worked to her. Paolo told a story of a pre-game ritual involving a figure from the competitive eating circuit named Badlands Chugs. He and his girlfriend are fans and apparently she got him a Cameo of how Paolo is participating in a 'trivia competition that's coming up'' and Paolo always watches is before every tape day. (Well its been working out for him so far.) Victoria told a story about how when her daughter Nora was younger one of her classmates said she had a picture of Victoria with the President. Victoria was baffled and then she explained: "That's not the President. That's Alex Trebek." Which honestly given the history of America in the 21^st century is probably better than having a picture with most Presidents or political figures in general.

LEADERBOARD AFTER SEPTEMBER 1^ST

VICTORIA GROCE – 12 MATCH POINTS (CLINCHED)

YOGESH RAUT – 11 MATCH POINTS (CLINCHED)

PAOLO PASCO – 7 MATCH POINTS (CLINCHED)

LONG NGUYEN – 5 MATCH POINTS

JUVERIA ZAHEER – 3 MATCH POINTS

ANDREW HE – 2 MATCH POINTS

 

With one game left the race for that final spot in the quarterfinals is wide open with a chance for Long, Juveria and Andrew all to clinch it. A win for Long guarantees it. For Juveria she has to win and in whatever game he plays in Long must finish third. For Andrew it’s the toughest: he has to win, Juveria has to finish no higher then second in whichever match she plays in, Long has to finish last and he must still hope for the tiebreaker to work for him.

It will all come down to tomorrow's game where anything can and often does happen. I'll be back Thursday morning with the official results.

My Predictions for the 2026 Emmys, Week 3, Part 2: Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama

 

As I mentioned when the nominations came out this particular category is the only one of almost every major Emmy category that I have an issue with the majority of the nominees. And since that in itself is a rarity I think I'm entitled to editorialize slightly here.

With due respect for three of the nominees the Emmys have done a major disservice to at least three incredible lead performances by excluding them. I speak not just of Paul Anthony Kelly for Love Story and Jamie Bell for Half Man but also Michael Shannon for Death By Lightning or for that matter Jude Law for Black Rabbit.  The third season of Monster was considered a huge disappointment by most critics and viewers and to recognize so much of the talent there as opposed to Half Man and Death by Lightning represent a failure on the part of the Emmys in what was essentially one of their better jobs in what has always been a top-heavy category. They've been improving immensely over the last few years. This is a slight misstep.

With that in mind, here are my predictions.

 

Riz Ahmed, Bait. For Playing: Shah Latif, a struggling actor who might be the next James Bond – if he can survive the night. Pro: Ahmed has over a very short period of time become one of the most undervalued actors in film and TV. Here he questions the world of race, Hollywood, capitalism and the place we have to keep in our culture in a show that is both dead-on in all of them and grimly funny simultaneously. This is a passion project for Ahmed which he wrote and produced for Amazon in a series that brings about superb moments for our time. Con: Ahmed's nomination is the only one Bait received from the Emmys and we know what that means. Combined with the fact that he has already won in this category for The Night Of makes it certain he has no real chance.

 

Jason Bateman, Black Rabbit. For Playing: Vince Friedken, the brother of a New York restaurateur who brings chaos and gangsters into the world. Pro: Bateman is one of the most nominated presences at the Emmys this year, nominated for producing and a supporting role in DTF St. Louis and for directing and lead acting in Black Rabbit. He spent much of the end of last year touring the awards circuit for his role in the latter, he will likely do the same at the end of this year for the latter. And it speaks to the incredible versatility of Bateman, who before this was already one of the great forces in television no matter which genre he was part of that the criminal brother who can't be trusted is so different from the adulterous weatherman in character that you really can't believe the same actor is playing the same role. That's before you get to the fact that Bateman has a horrible track record with the Emmys. He has been nominated for acting, directing and producing 16 times – four this year alone – and yet has only once for directing. The Emmys really owes him at least one award in that category by now. Con:  If Bateman wins an Emmy this year – which he might – it will more likely be for DTF St. Louis. And even then it's an uphill climb.

 

Charlie Hunnam, Monster: The Ed Gein Story. For Playing: Ed Gein, one of the first and most notorious serial killers in American history. Pro: Somehow this is the first Emmy nomination, really the first major award nomination that Hunnam has ever gotten. He was completely ignored (as was the entire show) for his work as Jax Teller in a show that was one of the most critically acclaimed of all times Sons of Anarchy. He has been part of such classic films as Children of Men and countless cult classics in the world of film and somehow this is his first major acting nomination he's gotten for anything. And as with all the previous versions of this series Hunnam disappears entirely into one of the greatest monsters that even after decades we are still struggling to comprehend. One can question whether this story should have been told but with Hunnam to anchor it you couldn't look away. Con: The third season that has been by far suffering the greatest backlash even before it debuted. It didn't help matters that by far this was the most disorganized, chaotic and overly gruesome season of a series that has been struggling with the argument it has glamorized its subject matter for a long time. While Hunnam receive every Best Actor in a Limited Series nomination at the end of the year the third season was not and it played out that same way in the Emmys. Hunnam is by far the best thing about what has been considered a truly horrific season and that's not a compliment.

 

Oscar Isaac, Beef (Experts Pick, My Pick). For Playing: Joshua, the manager of a country club struggling both with his  unstable job and the falling apart of his marriage. Pro: Somehow Isaac, who is one of the greatest actors of the last twenty years has not won a single award for any of his brilliant film and television work. Here, reunited with his co-star from Inside Llewyn Davis, Isaac gets to play Josh a man who has reached his forties and has failed in almost everything, from his life's ambitions to his marriage. And it turns out when he is caught in a compromising position, he is just as horrible at being an extortionist or being extorted, someone who is being squeezed from above and below, someone who doesn't know what the right thing is anymore. As the season continues to unfold and he ends up being caught in a position where everything is going to be taken away from him he continues to overestimate his position in the food chain and keeps screwing up. Yet there's an argument by the end of the series, both in the climax and the denouement that he seems to have come out on the other side having won. It's a superb performance of every level and worthy of recognition. Having triumphed at the Astras last month, he seems to be set up for a victory. Con: It is possible that the fact that some people were underwhelmed by Season 2 of Beef will end up working against almost every nominee. Isaac will probably not suffer for it, but it's definitely possible.

 

Matthew Rhys, The Beast in Me. (Dark Horse) For Playing: Nile Jarvis, the real estate mogul who may have killed his wife years ago and is trying to reestablish his legacy with his next door neighbor. Pro: Before he stunned everybody with his work in Widow's Bay as a man unable to deal with supernatural monsters, Rhys was just as stunning as a man whose mere presence was utterly terrifying every time he was onscreen. Every time he and Aggie Wiggs shared a scene, your skin would crawl and you would be terrified for the potential for harm that seemed just below the surface and as the series progresses it was very clear he had that potential to do horrible things. For an actor whose spent his career playing conflicting Everyman to this point Rhys's work as Nile Jarvis was as much a revelation as his work as Tom Loftis would be this spring. Rhys made Emmy history by becoming the first actor in thirty years to be nominated as Best Actor in Comedy and Limited Series and there are few actors I think deserve the privilege more. Con: The Emmys have never given any performer an Emmy for acting in two categories during the same year. While Rhys absolutely deserves to become the first to do so, I truly think the Emmys will spread the love just a little considering he's a lock to win Best Actor in a Comedy.

 

My Prediction: While I admit it’s a somewhat underwhelming group Isaac will likely end up rising to the top for his first Emmy.

 

Tomorrow I deal with Outstanding Lead Actress in a Limited Series/TV Movie. And this year TV Movie is very central to who might win.