July 17, 2012 at 10:27 am #250216
The recording of tonight’s (Tuesday night’s) webcast is now posted on the home page and it’s also — CLICK HERE:
If you missed our last one conducted last Saturday night, WATCH THIS — IT WAS SOCKO
WATCH EMMY NOMINATIONS LIVE ON GOLD DERBY’S HOME PAGE THIS THURSDAY AT 5:30 – 6:30 A.M. PACIFIC/ 8:30-9:30 A.M. EASTERN — WE’RE DOING A LIVE WEBCAST WITH OUR EDITORS OFFERING JUICY COMMENTARY
ALSO: WATCH EMMY NOMS RECAP THURSDAY NIGHT when Gold Derby’s editors powwow on our home page at 7-8 p.m. PT / 10-11 p.m. ETJuly 17, 2012 at 11:05 am #250218
Are you going to post your Emmy nominations coverage on youtube like last year?July 17, 2012 at 6:19 pm #250219
bumpJuly 17, 2012 at 6:30 pm #250220
I have been waiting all day.July 17, 2012 at 6:35 pm #250221
Is there a link? Did it start?July 17, 2012 at 9:20 pm #250222
I’ve actually had trouble watching the recorded version of the last webcast. I just get a blue screen that says ‘content is not currently online.’ Is anyone else having this issue?July 17, 2012 at 9:55 pm #250223
Recording of tonight’s webcast is now on the home page — it’s also below – CLICK HERE:
So … Derbyites: Tell us what you think of these shows…. Are they fun/ interesting/ worthwhile?
BE BRUTALLY HONEST!July 17, 2012 at 11:07 pm #250224
i thoroughly enjoy these webcasts. It’s very informative and its always great to hear critics opinions.July 18, 2012 at 2:48 am #250225
I really like these a lot! And I appreciate the fact that you record it so that people who aren’t able to always watch it live (like me), can watch it anyway. Thanks guys!July 18, 2012 at 5:16 am #250226
I love these webcasts. i’m glad that we got to speak of all the acting categories. I guess the one criticism I do have is that you didn’t do a movie/miniseries slugfest. But these webshows are great in every regard.July 18, 2012 at 8:27 am #250227
I think they’re good. We’ve all known everything that is discussed, we’ve been talking about it for months, but it’s fun to see this discussion live or on screen.
However, I do wonder why the predictions have to be listed in order of people’s chances of winning. You can even see this in the “experts” predictions, how some people don’t understand, don’t pay attention or don’t believe that it’s the eventual winner who should go first when you list predictions for nominations.
This should happen when we predict winners. Right now it doesn’t make sense, we should be listing them in order of lock for nominations and/or who be least think is going to get nominated. It would make much more sense when it comes to calculating odds, and Tom, you are an obvious example for changing this with this Laura Dern situation you have going on. You’re not convinced she will actually be nominated but you have her first because if she does, you think she will win. So right there you’re not actually predicting nominations. Tina Fey is last on your list because obviously there’s no way she’s winning but in reality she has much more of a shot than Dunham, Deschanel and Dern to be nominated.
It just doesn’t make sense for the nominations stage to have people listed like this.
And I don’t know if its ever your intention to do this, but it would be very fun to see all three of you watch the nominations announcement live. Or least recording it live and showing it later. Not even the discussions part, but the reactions should be fun to see.July 18, 2012 at 9:02 am #250228
Does everybody forget just a couple of weeks ago Zooey Deschanel won the CRITICS CHOICE for best comedy actress (She and Amy won the prize in a ie) Deschanel does have the buzzJuly 18, 2012 at 11:13 am #250229
Unfortunately, I think Laurie’s “Cuckoo’s Nest” 2-parter came up against Bryan Cranston’s 3rd season of Breaking Bad. Would’ve loved to see him get that tape last year, but I think he submitted the penultimate episode of House’s 7th, where he was operating on the tumor in his leg. Just not strong enough.July 19, 2012 at 10:38 am #250230
Tom, why was Tuesday’s podcast (the second webshow) made private? I can’t see it.