What #MeToo is Doing.. And What It Needs to Do

Over the last several months, with the revelations involving Harvey Weinstein acting as the catalyst, we have a seen a great deal of brave women coming forth with revelations that are truly shocking about some of the more powerful men not only in Hollywood, but in nearly every other industry as well.

I have been reluctant to comment on this, partially because I view this column as mainly having to do with television criticism first, and any other kind of commentary second. Being only a man, and not one with any real power, I feel that I have no business commenting on the tearing down of many actors, writers, and creative forces that I once admired, despite the fact that they I am personally sickened by what they have done. However, in light of certain events, I do think that there needs to be some discussion of what is going on.

Lots of these men in positions of power have done despicable things, for which they should be condemned and removed from their positions. However, I fear that lost in the mass onslaught of accusations has come a breakdown in the rule of law, which I believe in very strongly, and believe must be held to if any of these actions are to have any meaning. The phrase 'innocent until proven guilty' must have some significance, particularly in an era where public condemnation seems to mean more than prove.

However, I feel I must make some very specific connotations. If a man in power is accused of multiple incidents of harassment, assault or rape - and to be perfectly clear, 'multiple' means more than one or two - then I am certain that he is guilty. If the incidents involving Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein have taught us nothing else, it is that people like these are more than likely to have done this more than one time. Those people should be removed from their positions of power, and forced to face the full extent of our legal system, though one seriously doubts if any form of punishment could be considered suitable.  But if there is only a single accusation, then I do believe that there must be some form of due process. I seriously doubt the women have made a mistake, but without the law, without proper procedure, then we are proceeding into a world of darkness that I don't really think we will ever emerge from.  I believe in justice, then punishment in that order. And I rapidly fear in this new age, we are conflating both.

However, I want to be clear on something that seems to be getting lost in this movement. If the #me too group wants to get rid of all the people in America who are sexual predators, I don't object to that. What I do fear is that, in doing so, we are merely treating the symptoms rather than dealing with the disease.  You want to topple the patriarchy? Fine. But there are also problems that are at least as pressing, and as morally, if not as offensively repugnant. Never was this made clear in an incident that emerged last week, but got buried under a different series of firestorms.

This November, after Kevin Spacey was accused of multiple counts of sexual assault, Ridley Scott did a highly publicized reshoot of his movie All the Money in the World with Christopher Plummer taking over Spacey's role. Understandably, this was heavily publicized, mainly because of the scandals surrounding Spacey, and because the movie was being (and still is) under consideration for Academy Awards.

Then it got leaked that the two other co-leads for the film, Mark Wahlberg and Michelle Williams received appallingly disparate salaries for their work on reshoot. Wahlberg was paid well over a million dollars for his times, while Williams was made scarcely more than a thousand dollars. This was a big story for a couple of days, and then got buried under other entertainment and political news. But frankly, I find this just appalling, and in some ways, as morally offensive, as some of the accusations coming out of Hollywood.

Some would argue that Wahlberg should be receiving a larger salary because he is the bigger star. I call bullshit on that. For one thing, if nothing else, Williams should be receiving the same amount of money as Wahlberg regardless of anything else, if for no other reason than she's being billed higher than him in the trailers. But as someone who has been watching both Wahlberg and Williams act for more than two decades, Williams should be getting much more money than Wahlberg for any film she does. Wahlberg is a good actor - his work in such movies as The Departed and The Fighter demonstrates that. But Williams has been one of the more dominant actress in movies for more than a decade. She has received four Oscar nominations to Wahlberg's one over the same period.  Furthermore, she has been a major force in the independent film industry for more than a decade.

Now again, someone might argue than Williams has mainly worked in independent films, as opposed to Wahlberg who has headlined blockbusters. And that's not even worthy of an expletive. Are we honestly going to say that Wahlberg should be paid more than Williams because he starred in the most recent Transformers movies?  If we were going to pay actors based on the quality of their works, at a minimum Williams should be making twice Wahlberg's salary.

In the brief time that this story was going through the various medium, everyone admitted it was wrong that Williams wasn't being paid enough, but nobody suggested what needed to be done. Two days later, we were all on to the next story, and the next round of accusations.

But this needs to be dealt with, and frankly I think that the #MeToo and #Time'sUp people should devote at least a portion of their energy to trying to right the wrongs of salary inequality. This is something that needs to be dealt with. Weeding out those who assault is fine and has to happen. But if we just put in more people that have better personal behavior but  economic practices that are just as patriarchal, then there will be no real changes anywhere. And one hopes that's part of the movement too.

The Chi Review

For all the progress that Showtime has made over the last decade when it comes to its original programming, it hasn't exactly made leaps and bounds when it comes to doing series with predominantly African-American casts. So one wants to give credit to Showtime for trying to develop a series like The Chi (even though that's a terrible title) a series developed by such assured talent as Lena Waithe, an African-American woman who in 2017 became the first black woman to win an Emmy for writing, and Common, who managed to build some impressive work in WGN's cancelled to soon Underground. And admittedly, the series has aspirations that I admire - trying to see how a single murder in a playground has ripple effects around an entire neighborhood.

But The Chi is not The Wire or American Crime. It isn't even Treme.  And a huge part of the problem is that I'm three episodes into the series, and I still can't identify any distinctive characters. The Wire had a spider's web of a story, but it managed to identify rather strongly at least eight or nine real characters by this point in its run. In this series, Waithe, who so far, has introduced some interest characters but hasn't bothered to make connection between them all. A young man who played basketball was shot in the premiere. His body was identified by his mother, and the man who raised him Greavy, who was a CI to the detective investigating the murder, Cruz. Cruz makes a mistake, and tells him about a boy who was seen standing over the body. Greavy looks into to this boy, after the police end up releasing him, and he accidentally gets shot.  The boy's older brother, Brandon (Jason Mitchell) takes his death extremely hard, and clearly wants some kind of vengeance. But he's also trying to deal with problems with his mother, Laverne (Sonja Sohn, the only direct link to The Wire) , who is clearly some kind of addict, and who seems determined to ruin his life.

All of this is logical enough. But there are so many excess characters that so far haven't yet formed a link to the main plot. There's a twenty-ish man named Eugene, who's still living with his mother, Jada (Yolanda Ross) and who hasn't much evolved in his life beyond bringing multiple women home to his apartment to have sex. The fact that one of his girlfriends presented him with his son, and that his mother refuses to take care of him because 'her babysitting days are over' is funny, and there's a certain general pain in the fact that he's another black man raising a child without a father, but there's still no connection between this and the overarching plot. There's also an intriguing story about a ten-year old who works as a lookout on a corner, being roped in by a bigger girl to star in his grade school's production of The Wiz, but it seems even more scattershot, and one wishes they would stick to the drug story, because that at least has a point. And there's this older man named Q (Steven Williams) who seems to have some pull in this community, but one can't tell yet if he's this show's Stringer Bell or Avon Barksdale.

Arguably, the best parts of The Chi are when it tries to follow the investigation. There's a rivalry between Detective Cruz and another detective named Wallace in narcotics, who clearly doesn't like Cruz, and is far more cynical about the job that they do, When he pulls Cruz away from the stash house, and Cruz says one of the kids isn't involved, Wallace says: "Doesn't matter. Eventually he will be, and then all we have to do is file the paperwork. But part of the reason this works is because we know who they are - a lot of the time Waithe does a poor job of identifying her characters.

I admire this show for what it's trying to do, but compared to the recent spate of far better series on Showtime and some other network work on the urban scene, The Chi is a pale imitation. It may get better, and maybe at the end of the season, all the pieces will matter, but I'm not sure the audience will be around for the whole thing.

My score:2.75 stars.

And The Winner Was...

For those of you who have been regular followers of my blog, you will know that I am a rabid fan of award shows. Why then, after going through so much buildup over the last month, did I not have any reaction at all to the Golden Globes or the Critics Choice awards?

There are a lot of small answers that have to do with personal issues, but what it essentially comes down to this that for the Golden Globes - and to a lesser extent, the Broadcast Critics - I was not that impressed with how they gave their awards.. Usually, both the Hollywood Foreign Press and The Broadcast Critics both have had a certain amount of variety when it comes to who wins the awards mainly in relation to the Emmys. But in regard to the majority of the awards for both organizations, they didn't really make much in deviation from last years awards. Sterling Brown took the prize for Best Actor from both organizations. Elisabeth Moss and The Handmaid's Tale triumphed at both. Big Little Lies took the Best Limited Series prize from both, and Nicole Kidman, Alexander Skarsgard, and Laura Dern triplicated their triumphs at the Emmys. And Ann Dowd prevailed at the Broadcast Critics for Supporting Actress

Now, let's be clear. All of these actors deserved to win. I have no real problem with them repeating. But over the past few years, the Globes and the Broadcast Critics have shown more variety in their giving of awards. And I have come to rely on them on giving more diversity when it comes to rewarding shows that otherwise would get lost in the shuffle. It would've been nice for Tatiana Maslany or The Good Fight to win some awards. They still might.

More to the point, I think that both award shows disappointed me as entertainment. The Golden Globes had some nice moments, and Seth Meyers did a far better job hosting than Jimmy Fallon did, but it didn't sing the same way it usually did. And the Broadcast Critics made the mistake of going from A&E to the CW, which would have been reasonable had they not for some inexplicable reason cut the air time to two hours instead of the usual three. For those who have watched the show, a lot of awards get cut out just in the three hour run tie - it was like watching the fifteen-minute version of Hamlet. Even this wouldn't have been bad had they gotten a decent host, but Olivia Munn who is usually hysterically funny, seemed more intent on wearing her activist hat then her comic one, which really dragged things down.

There were some intriguing awards which I was grateful for. I was glad that both the Globes and the Critics Choice selected Ewan McGregor for his superb dual performance in Fargo, which he definitely got shortchanged for by the Emmys. I was immensely happy to see Rachel Brosnahan and The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel emerge triumphant in the Best Actress and Best Comedy category for both award shows, and I really, really hope that the Emmys will have to consider it a serious contender, particularly with it looking more and more likely that Veep will not be eligible this year. As for the Critics Choice, I was ecstatic that Ted Danson triumphed as Best Actor in a Comedy for his superb performance in The Good Place, and hope this serves as a bellwether, and I really hope that David Harbour's triumph in Best Supporting Actor for his superb performance on Stranger Things leads to an Emmy, even though it's a long way to September. I was also glad to see Walon Goggins and Mayim Bialik win Best Supporting Actor and Actress in a Comedy, and hope that they can find some Emmy love this year. Both have been criminally underserved by the Academy.

It is perhaps shocking that the most enjoyable awards show this year was the SAG awards. For the last decade, they have been stuck in the same repetitious pattern the Emmys were in, giving Alec Baldwin, six consecutive prizes, Mad Men, three in a row, and Orange is the New Black,  best Comedy Series the last three years, even though the Emmy don't consider it a comedy any more.  There was a certain amount of repetition this year as well -  William H. Macy and Julia-Louis Dreyfus each took their second consecutive prize for Best Actor and Best Actor in a Comedy. But Veep's victory served as the first sign of growth for awhile - even though it was not a great series last season, and even though the SAGs are reaching backward nominating revivals of Curb your Enthusiasm and Will & Grace, this is the first sign of forward momentum the SAGs have had in this category, in nearly a decade.

There were even more encouraging signs in the Drama category. Sterling Brown's win was a nice surprise, but This is Us' triumph bordered on historic. Not only was it a more than worthy winner, it was the first broadcast drama to triumph at the SAGs since Lost.  I really hope the Emmy judges keep this in mind, and it looks like they're headed in the right direction. As for Claire Foy, I'll give her that one. This was her last year in The Crown.

The awards show itself was rather fun. For the first time in its history, it had a host, and Kirsten Bell was by far the most entertaining emcee so far this year. She was witty and charming, and the rest of the presenters were equally skilled. Its telling that Olivia Munn and Niecy Nash were far funnier doing a bit on the SAgs than they were here. If she can do it again, next year, I'd be more than willing to watch. Just try to give the acting prizes in a limited series to someone other than Nicole Kidma

Homicide Episode Guide: Narcissus

Written by Yaphet Kotto

Directed by Jean de Segonzac

After a series has been on the air for long enough, it is common for actors on the show to step behind the camera---  Clark Johnson and Kyle Secor have already done so this season. It is much rarer, though, that an actor will write an episode of a series. Indeed, I know of only two series where this has happened --- The X-Files and Homicide. In this latter case Yaphet Kotto would be the only actor to do so, and he would do it three times, starting with ‘Narcissus’.

The episode that Kotto delivers is a thought provoking one for many reasons. The first is that it deals with tricky racial issues. Despite the fact that a third of the leads, half the regulars  and a goodly amount of the guest cast was black, Homicide  did not often show episodes involving racial strife (which is especially ironic considering how many murders are caused for that very reason). Here, Kotto delves in to it deeply by having the episode center around a black organization called  the African Revival Movement. Headed by an ex-Baltimore police calling himself Burundi Robinson (members draw their names from African countries) the movement involves itself with reaching out and trying to help the black community from soup kitchens to finding jobs for the homeless.

But there is an ugly side to the Movement, as we find out when one of its members is murdered. Talking with a witness, Munch and Pembleton learn that Robinson has been sleeping with many of the young women in the movement. Because of this Robinson had him killed.

But there is far more to this case than just the murder. When Frank and Munch show up on the crime scene Colonel Barnfather is present, trying to curtail the search for the killer. When the killer—another member of the ARM is found Captain Gaffney talks to him after which he refuses to talk to the police. Later, he fouls up a wiretap on Robinson by demanding the name of the witness. 

These scenes show some stunning insights into Barnfather and Gaffney. We know from past events that Barnfather is a manipulative and political animal but here he reveals he has a conscience. Arriving at the crime scene, he allows Pembleton to quote procedure on him and stop him from pulling rank. For the first time on the show, he draws a line in the sand as to what he thinks it right. Gaffney, on the other hand, reveals what a cruel and mercenary bastard he is. Not only does he pull rank on Gee repeatedly, he bullies Ed Danvers and near the episodes climax, is willing to go over Barnfather’s head. This is the first time that we have seen all the brass not on the same side and  we realize that even though they don’t show it often, sometimes the high ranking officers have consciences of their own

Frustrated by this, Giardello comes up with a brilliant idea as to make the killer talk. He, Pembleton and Munch call the murderer into the box, and then have a conversation about the case as if he isn’t there.  After revealing some brutal truths they spook the murderer into giving Robinson up. But when they try to arrest Robinson, he barricades himself in the ARM headquarters and it is only through Frank’s actions that a riot doesn’t break out.

Realizing the potential for a massacre Gee goes in the building—without a gun--- and asks to talk to Robinson. And here we have one of the most shocking revelations that the series would do, period. The man who has been manipulating the brass to protect Robinson is none other then Deputy Commissioner Harris. Turns out Harris and Robinson were partners twenty-five years ago and after they busted a major dealer, Harris stole those drugs from evidence control and sold them back to the dealer. With both of them on the hook, Harris convinced Robinson to handle ‘damage control’-- Robinson took the rap for Harris in exchange for the money. From this incredible corruption, Harris has risen to great heights in the Baltimore PD. And now that he has his feet to the fire Harris has no trouble betraying a case—and authorizing QRT to kill his former partner.

They never get the chance, though. Giardello tries to convince Robinson to surrender but the most he does is release all the women and children. Hours pass as the tension mounts. Finally, QRT and the squad storm the building. In the basement they find Robinson and fifteen of his followers dead in a mini- Jonestown.

However, the most stunning element is the denouement. Gee can rage all he wants about bringing down Harris, but in the end the average American watching at home doesn’t give a damn about black people killing each other. A couple is shown watching the news unfold on television. They look at it dispassionately and change channels, utterly uninterested. We never learn if this ever goes any further than this episode, but after this Harris was written out of the series--- small justice for those involved.

Kotto clearly demonstrates in this episode that he has the rhythm of Homicide down cold. Issues such as the Mahoney shooting and Bayliss’ absence from the squad are dealt with briefly but in style. Stivers is having trouble coming to grips with the murder of Mahoney--- she hasn’t been sleeping or eating. Kellerman, however, has no problem with it. But the downward spiral is still to come. Kotto also shakes things up by having Frank tell a bizarre news story that Munch is known for telling occasionally.

 More than that he demonstrates that he understands the hierarchy of the PD. Ultimately it plays like a typical episode—which is what he was aiming for. The sequence between Robinson and Giardello is the most unrealistic but Kotto and Roger Robinson (playing Burundi) make it work very well--- particularly in their last exchanges when Burundi bets his final actions on the flip of an imaginary coin --- and then tells him ‘You lose.’ Watching it still sends chills down my spine.

The one flaw of the show comes by the fact that again half the cast is ignored—Kyle Secor, Clark Johnson and Melissa Leo are given nothing to do. Still, ‘Narcissus’ is a fascinating story that shows a lot of different twists on characters that we would not expect. It also asks the question about what role the black man really has in society. Put another way, is Gee a black man who’s a cop or a cop who happens to be black. For him, the former seems to be true. For Frank, the latter seems more relevant. And for someone like Harris, he doesn’t seem t be ether. Sometimes power means you lose parts of yourself, and in Harris’ case he gave up everything.

My score: 4.25 stars.

Homicide Episode Guide: Deception

Written by Debbie Sarjeant; story by Tom Fontana, Julie Martin, and James Yoshimura

Directed by Peter Medak

In the real  world, drug dealers like Luther Mahoney probably do exist. And in real life, they do get away with murder again and again and again without ever setting foot in jail. However, in the world of television, the bad guys are not allowed to perpetually triumph. We get enough depressing news in the paper and on CNN; once a while the good guys got to win. That is probably why in ‘Deception’ (which probably not by chance, coincided with the May sweeps) the Professor Moriarty of Homicide faces justice. However, Fontana and associates are not going to let this go smoothly, nor are there going to be no consequences.

For two years, we have watched Kellerman and Lewis go after the slippery Mahoney with absolutely no success. Now an opportunity literally falls into their labs when a Nigerian drug mule dies in a third-rate motel when the condoms containing Mahoney’s latest shipment of heroin bursts in his stomach. The department, headed by Stivers and aided by the FBI (including a customs agent named Borders) cease upon this opportunity to put a sting on the drug dealer. In a move that shows how ruthless cops can be they substitute baking soda for the heroin and send an agent disguised as another courier with the faux shipment. Twelve hours later, hell break loose as the dope fiends of Baltimore find that the crap they’re snorting isn’t anywhere near genuine. When the crap reaches Mahoney, he loses the cool that he has possessed   in every previous encounter with him and begins to blow up, mainly at the lieutenant in his organization that received the heroin. Convinced that either he or the Nigerians that serve as his suppliers have double crossed him, Mahoney arranges a daylight meeting in Druitt Hill Park. Here the detectives hope to swoop up the guts of the organization. This being Homicide, it doesn’t work out that way.

Pissed beyond belief at his supposed betrayal Mahoney kills the lieutenant he thinks is responsible (as well as a passerby who gets in the way of a bullet) and flees the scene before the cops can nab him. Enraged at how the sting goes Meldrick grabs a squad car and chases Mahoney back to his apartment, where Luther is preparing to flee. Luther immediately surrenders but that’s not good enough for the detective who has had to clean up after a dozen homicides related to him. He delivers a serious beat-down on Luther but in the course of it Mahoney gets his hands on Meldrick’s gun. A few seconds later Kellerman and Stivers burst in, telling Mahoney to surrender. In a fifteen second sequence that is repeated ad infinitum throughout season six, Mahoney puts his gun down in apparent surrender. Kellerman tells him he has the right to remain silent, and then bang!  He shoots Luther in the chest.

Why did Mike, a basically good cop, commit this kind of shooting? Psychoanalysis is not part of these reviews, but it’s probably a combination of frustration with Mahoney’s ability to manipulate the system combined with how Mike’s own experience being investigated for bribes last year. He has come through the system one side and come out the other. Gone is the apparent righteousness that he showed earlier. When Gee asks him about the shooting, he has no problem lying to his boss as to the exact circumstances of the murder. Meldrick willingly backs him up and, more reluctantly, so does Stivers. Both detectives will begin to draw away from Mike in the months to come--- Meldrick will stop partnering with him; Stivers won’t want to work with him, period and slowly Kellerman will become more isolate from the squad in general. In the space of a year, everything he has worked for will have deteriorated into nothing.

Even with all this going on, the show still has time to have a secondary story. Munch receives a call on an old case of Bolander’s from a paroled  gangster wannabe named ‘Punchy’ DeLeon, out after doing a ten-year stretch for murder. He gives the location of a man who was murdered ten years earlier who is supposedly buried  under the parking lot at Pimloco race track. Only when Munch has the lot dug up, no body is to be found. Munch then begins a search for the dead man only to find him very much alive in a home in Baltimore. Unfortunately, he isn’t alive for long --- Punchy has followed Munch and tracked him down.  After the lot has been repaved Munch catches up to Punchy. The dead man killed the man Punchy just got out of prison for killing, and this was his version of payback.  This case is very funny and also surprisingly poignant, mostly from the restrained performance of Lewis Black as Punchy. Those who recognize him from his weekly rants on The Daily Show will barely recognize the comedian who has done his time for a murder he didn’t commit and now has to go back for doing a justifiable one.

There is even a brief recap back to Bayliss and Pembleton, who have patched up their feud and are back to working together. But the issue that separated them has resurfaced---  Tim goes out to see and care for his Uncle George. This issue will still cause strife between Tim and Frank for what remains of season 5.

So much happens in ‘Deception’ that we almost feel cheated when Mike and Meldrick are seen writing up their reports for the Mahoney shooting—all this excitement for so little. What neither of them know is that Luther will end up haunting everybody--- especially Kellerman and Lewis--- for the next year until the squad is literally torn apart. Maybe the executives at NBC thought this was there kind of positive resolution to a popular character’s storyline. They forgot that on Homicide nothing goes away and problems are not resolved by enough bullets

.

My score: 4.5 stars.

Ranking by fans: 11th

Broadcast Critic's Choice Picks, Part 3: Limited Series

I have no idea how the TV Movie/Limited Series are going to go, or even if the majority of them will be aired Thursday night. They generally get cut. But just in case...

BEST LIMITED SERIES

Theoretically, this should be a lock for Big Little Lies, which has already swept the Emmys and the Golden Globes. But the Broadcast Critics have always had a taste for Fargo - they were the only series to honor for its first two seasons, profusely. Fargo might well end up prevailing, but it's just as likely that Big Little Lies will triumph.

Should Win: Fargo.

Will Win: Big Little Lies.

BEST ACTOR, TV MOVIE OR LIMITED SERIES

This is probably the easiest one of the night. Given that the Broadcast Critics love Fargo, that he was robbed of the Emmy, that he just won the Golden Globe, oh yeah, and he gave two memorable performances, look for Ewan McGregor to triumph in this category.

Should Win/Will Win: McGregor.

BEST ACTRESS, TV MOVIE OR LIMITED SERIES

This might be the clearest category where we could have an upset. One would be inclined to just give Nicole Kidman the heads up, and be done with it. But we've had upsets in this category before. I think there's a real possibility that Carrie Coon, so superb in her work as Gloria in Fargo, could end up managing to triumph here. Two years ago, she managed a similar upset in the Best Actress in a Drama category over equally remarkable competition. I think she has a real chance here, given the possibility for a split in the vote.

Should Win: Coon.

Will Win: Kidman/Coon.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR, TV MOVIE OR LIMITED SERIES

This one will probably end up going to Alexander Skarsgard for his work in Big Little Lies. It's possible that either David Thewlis or Benito Martinez will end up with an upset (I'd particularly like to see Martinez, who was criminally underrecognized for his superlative work on American Crime, prevail), but I have a feeling this is one time the critics will follow the Emmys, and I don't object that much.

Should Win: Martinez.

Will Win: Skarsgard.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS, TV MOVIE OR LIMITED SERIES

Again, this would seem like an easy win for Laura Dern, especially considering Shailene Woodley isn't there to draw votes away, like she was at the Golden Globes. But again, you can never be sure what the Critic's Choice will do. Both times Fargo was eligible in this category, they won. And it's just as likely someone will prevail today.

I'd personally like to see Mary Elizabeth Winstead prevail for her superb work, particularly since she was ignored completely by the Emmys. But I have a feeling it will either go to Dern or maybe Regina King, whose work was at is usual level of brilliance in the final season of American Crime.

Should Win: King/Winstead.

Will Win: King/Dern.

See you Friday, when I post on the results.

Broadcast Critic Choice Predictions: Part 2, Comedies

Now, on to the comedies. This'll be far tougher to handicap, because none of the winners or nominees from last season have even been nominated this time out. Having fun, yet?

BEST COMEDY SERIES

One would assume, given that Marvelous Mrs. Maisel triumphed earlier this week at the Globes, it would be the favorite.  But given that Amazon has had more luck in the acting categories than the others, I'm going to give the edge to the series with the most nominations, and likely the most response: GLOW. I'd still prefer if Maisel or black-ish won, but you never know...

Should Win: black-ish.

Will Win: GLOW.

BEST ACTOR, COMEDY

With Donald Glover ineligible and William H. Macy not here, my personal preference would be for Ted Danson, whose work on The Good Place by far showed the most range. But I think it's more likely to go to Aziz Ansari for his superb work on Master of None. Granted, much of his better work was behind the camera, but since the series isn't nominated, I think this is the best way to pay tribute.

Should Win: Danson.

Will Win: Ansari.

BEST ACTRESS, COMEDY

Let's be honest. Kirsten Bell has been forking due an award ever since Veronica Mars, and her character has by far shown the most growth on The Good Place. She might pull out a win, anyway, but I think it's just as likely to go to my second choice, Rachel Brosnahan for her fine work on Marvelous Mrs. Maisel. She's already won the Golden Globe, and she's been due a trophy of her own since the first season on House of Cards.

Should Win: Bell/Brosnahan.

Will Win: Brosnahan.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR, COMEDY

Louie Anderson is absent from the chase, so this one is even more wide open. With no clear front-runner, my guess is this one will go to one of the more nominated series. Marc Maron has been one of my favorite comedians for nearly twenty years, and his find work as the promoter who becomes the most loathsome character on the show makes it likely that he will prevail. There is a possibility Kumail Nanjani will win here, but I say the best chance is still Maron's.

Should Win: Maron.

Will Win: Maron.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS, COMEDY

We keep getting new ones. I would prefer to see Alex Borstein prevail for her work on Mrs. Maisel, but I have a feeling its going to go to one of the better actresses in this category, Mayim Bialik for her superb work on The Big Bang Theory. Could the Emmys just give her one award please?

Should Win: Borstein.

Will Win: Bialik.