Entertainment

Best and worst moments of the 2025 Emmys, from Stephen Colbert to that money clock

Published

7 months ago

September 15, 2025

Best and worst moments of the 2025 Emmys, from Stephen Colbert to that money clock

Sunday’s Emmy Awards had the usual mix of light-hearted moments and powerful speeches, along with some surprise wins in the acting categories. So if there’s one thing we should always remember about television’s biggest night, it’s this: What might seem predictable sometimes isn’t and that’s what makes this awards show worth watching.

Here, Times writers share their favorite moments of the night, and one that perhaps shouldn’t be repeated.

Best standing ovation: Stephen Colbert

Stephen Colbert with his “Late Show” crew after winning his first Emmy for talk series.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

We knew going into the Emmys that Stephen Colbert would be on the receiving end of the night’s biggest outpouring of love. But even knowing that, I wouldn’t have guessed just how electrifying the ovation Colbert would receive when he won the talk series Emmy for his recently canceled late-night show. That the ceremony was aired on CBS, the network that unceremoniously dumped him, offered a bit of delicious irony, as well as an opportunity for Colbert to air a grievance or two. But that’s not the man’s style.

Colbert said he initially wanted to make a late-night comedy show about love. But as the years passed in his 10-year run, he realized the show was really about loss.

“And that’s related to love, because sometimes you only truly know how much you love something when you get a sense that you might be losing it,” Colbert said. “And in September of 2025 my friends, I have never loved my country more desperately. God bless America. Stay strong, be brave.” And one more thing, he added in a nod to Prince. “If the elevator tries to bring you down, go crazy and punch a higher floor.” — Glenn Whipp

Best speech: ‘Culture belongs to the people,’ Cris Abrego says

One of the most riveting and truthful speeches of the night came not from a celebrity, but from Television Academy Chairman Cris Abrego, who used his time onstage before presenting the Bob Hope Humanitarian Award to lament the cataclysmic Congressional funding cuts for the Corp. for Public Broadcasting. When Abrego first mentioned the cuts, the audience erupted in an effusive and concerted round of booing.

“In a time when division dominates the headlines, storytelling still has the power to unite us,” Abrego said. “Television and the artists who make it do more than reflect society. They shape our culture, and in times of cultural regression, they remind us of what’s at stake and what can still be achieved.”

Abrego also said that generations of artists have used the power of television to, “broaden horizons, challenge the status quo and bend that arc of history, towards justice.” The words hit home in a room full of creatives struggling with how to walk a tightrope between corporate mandates to make money and not offend, and government attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion.

“All of us in this room must continue to champion that power and wield it responsibly,” Abrego said. “In moments like this, neutrality is not enough. We must be voices for connection, inclusion, empathy.”

Culture, Abrego concluded, “Doesn’t come from the top down. It rises from the bottom up. Culture belongs to the people. So if our industry is to thrive, we need to make room for more voices, not fewer.” — Jessica Gelt

Best squeal of the night: Katherine LaNasa

A woman in a white dress with a blue bow across the chest stands at a mic with a golden statuette.

Katherine LaNasa’s radiant smile is contagious enough, but when she let out that girlish squeal after a clearly unexpected victory, I felt her excitement in my bones. Clearly so did LaNasa’s partner-in-care Noah Wyle, who looked just as proud to see the first-time nominee up on the stage as he would end up scaling it an hour later.

Beating out “The White Lotus” actors was no small feat — especially considering the season-saving monologue from Carrie Coon — and that LaNasa delivered a fan-favorite performance while dancing her way through it between takes is all the more heartening. Hopefully the same nurses that LaNasa toasted to in her speech, those whose grit and gentleness are manifest in Dana Evans, will feel that they are sharing in this win.

This one is also for the “Imposters” groupies, who know LaNasa should have gotten her flowers for embodying a tough maternal figure long ago. — Malia Mendez

Best shout out to their mom: Tramell Tillman

A man in a white tuxedo stands next a woman in a long black dress.

Tramell Tillman had a historic victory on Sunday, becoming the first Black actor to win for supporting actor in a drama series. His performance as Seth Milchick in Season 2 of “Severance” showcases his range, as his character seesaws from a cheery to chilling middle manager. Whether it was a tête-à-tête with Lumon boss Mr. Drummond, where Mr. Milchick is told to shorten his words before choosing to do the opposite — his phrase “devour feculence” seethes with quiet rage — or leading a drumline in the dramatic season finale, Tillman stole many scenes.

In his acceptance speech, Tillman thanked his mother for his achievement: “Mama, you were there for me when no one else was, and no one else would show up. This is for you.”

I think Kier would approve this moment of frolic for him and his mother. — Maira Garcia

Best reference to their innie/outie: Britt Lower

A woman in an orange dress holds up a golden statuette as she stands in front of a blue backdrop.

First-time Emmy winner Britt Lower, star of “Severance,” thanked (one) of her characters in the drama series in her acceptance speech for “choosing” her. When she headed backstage to speak with reporters, she said she wasn’t quite sure what she meant by that.

“It feels like getting to play this role within all of her layers has been a real kind of meeting of a soulmate. Getting to walk through the world the way she does and see the world from her point of view has given me a lot of strength,” Lower told The Times of her dual role as Helly R./Helena Eagan. “I don’t know how she chose me, that’s just how it feels.”

When she got another question from a reporter who joined the press room via Zoom, Lower looked around for where the booming voice over the speakers could be coming from.

“I couldn’t see your face, so it felt like you were kind of like Lumon,” she said. “A disembodied voice in the room.”

Something I wish I’d asked about before she headed backstage was the message scribbled on the back of her speech notes: “LET ME OUT,” it read, perhaps invoking the spirit of Helly R. — Kaitlyn Huamani

Best surprise win for a small yet powerful show: Jeff Hiller

A man in a pink suit holds an envelope and a golden statuette at a mic stand.

Jeff Hiller winning supporting actor in a comedy series for “Somebody Somewhere” is the best thing I’ve seen on an awards show in … well, possibly ever. HBO’s dramedy is a small show by any metric, but like many small things, it is exquisite and Hiller is a big reason why. Playing Joel, a gay, devoutly Christian man in a small town, Hiller fearlessly leaned into dichotomy and sincerity, which is very difficult to do. His Joel had a gimlet eye and wore his heart on his sleeve; he was sometimes goofy but always in on the joke. There was nothing flashy or predictable about Hiller’s performance. A deceptively quiet role in a deceptively quiet series, it was astonishingly powerful.

Still, despite some critical acclaim, no one expected Hiller to be nominated, much less win, including Hiller himself. As bigger shows took the stage again and again, his teary-eyed acceptance speech reminded us that television is full of tremendous shows that, for whatever reason, fly under the radar. And those shows are full artists of all kinds who endure the rejections and compromises, make a years-long career out of small gigs, who consistently hone their craft and when they are finally given the chance, do amazing work. “Somebody Somewhere” may, as he said in his acceptance speech, have changed Hiller’s life but he was there all along, just waiting to shine. — Mary McNamara

Best nod to ‘Star Wars’ fans: Dan Gilroy

A man holding a statuette at a mic stand.

When “Andor’s” Dan Gilroy took the stage to accept the Emmy for writing for a drama series and said, “We have friends everywhere,” I cheered. As fans of the “Star Wars” series know, the phrase was a play on the words members of the Rebellion say to each other on the show to confirm their allegiance when meeting for the first time.

Gilroy’s win marked the first Primetime Emmy Award bestowed upon the spy thriller, which had won four awards at the Creative Arts Emmys just last week. I’ve sang “Andor’s” praises since its first season premiered way back in 2022, so I’m glad the Television Academy is finally catching up. As Gilroy mentioned in his speech, “Andor” is “a story about ordinary people fighting impossible odds.”

The episode that he wrote involves an elected government official taking a very public stand against authoritarianism, propaganda and genocide in a speech meant to coalesce the various resistance cells into one Rebel Alliance. And while the show itself is inspired by history, its themes have never felt more relevant than they do now. I hope this moment helps convince people who had written off “Andor” because of their preconceptions of the “Star Wars” franchise to finally check it out. — Tracy Brown

Best chat about an ‘Ugly Betty’ reboot: Michael Urie

A man in a burgundy suit adjusts a cuff link as he stands near a white curtained wall.

With a ceremony that spent time paying tribute to “Golden Girls” and “Gilmore Girls,” maybe it was fitting that in spending my afternoon with first-time nominee Michael Urie, nominated for his supporting role in Apple TV+’s “Shrinking,” I mentioned my love (and recent rewatch) of ABC’s mid-aughts primetime soap “Ugly Betty,” which celebrates the 20th anniversary of its premiere next year. So you can imagine my excitement when Urie, who starred in the show, as he was getting into his plum-hued ensemble for the night, stopped to point out the “Ugly Betty” Season 4 wrap gift he had in tow: A medium-sized sling bag with a patch reading “UBS4” adhered to its side, commemorating the season.

“I just realized that I’ve had it all these years,” he says, stopping to give me a tour of the weathered black bag. “It’s the greatest bag I’ve ever had and over the years I’ve tried to phase it out, and I’ve gotten other bags, but they don’t make it like this one — and this one survives.”

It gets us on the topic of reboots — and my hesitation with Hollywood’s proclivity to try to recapture lightning in a bottle.

“The further we get from it, the less I would be interested,” he says. “I mean, we all would, of course, do it if they want us to do a revival. And we talk about it every year, but the further we get, the more I don’t know. I just don’t see how you could get those characters back in the same dynamics.”

Could Marc St. James, the loyal and snarky assistant to top high-fashion magazine creative director Wilhelmina Slater (Vanessa Williams), who Urie perfectly portrayed, be a big shot editor these days? When the series ended in 2010, Wilhelmina becomes editor-in-chief, with Marc remaining by her side.

“You’d have to figure out some way to get him back under Wilhelmina,” he says. “And I’m too old to be running around to as an assistant.” — Yvonne Villarreal

Worst countdown: That money clock

A man stands on a stage with a big screen reading negative $26,000.

This year’s Emmys employed a novel, off-putting and deeply annoying way of trying to keep acceptance speeches short. At the beginning of the show, host Nate Bargatze announced that $100,000 was going to be donated to the Boys & Girls Club of Los Angeles, but whenever a winner went over, the money would start to drop. The visual of winners trying to express themselves while a projection of the money going to a beloved children’s charity plummeted behind them, was not great. It also had unpredictable results. John Oliver raced through his speech in about five seconds and ran off stage. Others, like Hannah Einbinder, kept talking and said she’d pay the swiftly depleting money back.

The funds plunged to $30,000 when 15-year-old Owen Cooper gave his speech after making history as the youngest person ever to win in an acting category. After Cooper left the stage, Bargatze deadpanned, “That was a show ‘Adolescence’ that did that to adolescents.”

When there were 10 minutes left of the telecast, the total stood at negative $26,000. “We’re already in debt,” said Seth Rogen, as the speeches ran long after “The Studio” won for best comedy series. “We’ve f—ed over the boys and girls.”

As Homer Simpson would say, “It’s funny ‘cause it’s true.” At the very end of the night Bargatze announced he would up the total donation to $350,000, but it still came across as an afterthought. — J.G.

Entertainment

Bob Spitz proves the Rolling Stones are rock’s greatest band in magnificent new biography

Published

1 hour ago

April 20, 2026

Press Room

Bob Spitz proves the Rolling Stones are rock’s greatest band in magnificent new biography

By early 1963, the Station Hotel in London had become an epicenter of the burgeoning British blues scene. On a blustery, snowy night that February, the Rolling Stones’ classic early lineup took the stage for one of the first times, dazzling the audience with ferocious renditions of blues standards like Muddy Waters’ “I Want to Be Loved” and Jimmy Reed’s “Bright Lights, Big City.”

Multi-instrumentalist Brian Jones, the band’s founder and leader, synchronized guitars with Keith Richards, who favored a distinctive slashing and stinging style. Drummer Charlie Watts, the group’s newest member, a jazz aficionado and an accomplished percussionist, propelled the music forward with a rock-solid beat.

Anchoring the rhythm section with him was bassist Bill Wyman, who was recruited more for his spare VOX AC30 amp that the guitarists could plug into than for his musical skills. The stoic bassist proved a strong and innovative player. Together, he and Watts would go on to form one of rock’s most decorated rhythm sections.

Ian Stewart’s energetic boogie-woogie piano style rounded out the sound. Months later, manager Andrew Loog Oldham kicked him out of the band for being “ugly,” although Stewart continued to record, tour and serve as the band’s road manager until his death in 1985.

This April 8, 1964, file photo shows the Rolling Stones during a rehearsal. The members, from left, are Brian Jones, guitar; Bill Wyman, bass; Charlie Watts, drums; Mick Jagger, vocals; and Keith Richards, guitar.

(Associated Press)

Fronting the group was Mick Jagger. Channeling the music like a crazed shaman, Jagger shimmied and sashayed, owning the stage like few lead singers have before or since. By the end of the night, the Stones had the crowd in a frenzy. Although only 30 people had made it to the gig because of the treacherous weather conditions, the hotel’s booker had seen enough: He offered the Stones a regular gig.

“The Rolling Stones had caught fire. The music they were playing and the way they played it struck a chord with a young crowd starved for something different, something their own… It was soul-stirring, loud and uncompromising,” writes Bob Spitz in “The Rolling Stones: The Biography,” his magisterial work that charts the 60-year journey of “the greatest rock and roll band in the world.”

Spitz, the author of strong biographies on the Beatles and Led Zeppelin, as well as Ronald Reagan and Julia Child, captures the drama, trauma and betrayals that have kept the Stones in the public’s consciousness for more than six decades. It’s all here: The Stones’ evolution from a blues cover band to artistic rival of the Beatles; the musical peaks — “Aftermath,” “Let It Bleed” and “Exile on Main Street” as well as misfires like “Dirty Work”; Keith’s descent into a debilitating heroin addiction that nearly destroyed him and the band; the death of the ‘60s at the ill-fated Altamont free concert; Marianne Faithfull, Anita Pallenberg, Bianca Jagger, Jerry Hall and other lovers, partners and muses; the breakups, makeups and crackups; and perhaps most important, the unbreakable bond between Jagger and Richards at the center of it all.

Although Spitz unearths little new information, he excels at presenting the Stones in glorious Technicolor. Spitz homes in on the telling details and anecdotes that give the band’s story a deep richness and poignancy.

Take “Satisfaction,” the Stones’ 1965 classic and first U.S. chart topper. The oft-told story is that Richards woke up in the middle of the night, grabbed the guitar that was next to his bed, and recorded the iconic riff and the phrase “I can’t get no … satisfaction” on a cassette recorder in his Clearwater, Fla., hotel room before falling back asleep. But as Spitz notes, the song initially went nowhere in the studio. That is until Stewart purchased a fuzz box for Richards a few days later, which gave the tune a raunchier sound that perfectly matched Jagger’s lyrics of frustration and alienation. A classic was born.

Piercing the Stones mythology

Spitz’s deep reporting often pierces the mythology surrounding the band. Contrary to the popular belief of many fans, for instance, Jones bears much of the responsibility for the rift with his bandmates and his tragic demise.

The most musically adventurous member of the group — he plays sitar on “Paint It Black” and dulcimer on “Lady Jane” — Jones wasn’t a songwriter. That stoked his jealousies and insecurities, along with frontman Jagger stealing the spotlight from him. A monster of a man, Jones impregnated multiple teenage girls and physically and emotionally abused several women, including Pallenberg. Perhaps that’s why she left him for Richards. Over time, Jones made fewer contributions in the studio and onstage, becoming a catatonic drug casualty. The Stones fired Jones in June 1969 but would have been justified doing so a couple years earlier. He drowned in his pool less than a month later.

Similarly, Stones lore has long romanticized the making of “Exile on Main Street” in the stifling, dingy basement of Richards’ rented Villa Nellcôte in the South of France, where the Stones had decamped to avoid British taxes. In this telling, Richards, deep in the throes of heroin addiction, somehow managed to come up with one indelible riff after another built around his signature open G tuning — taught to him by Ry Cooder — leading the band to create one of the best albums in rock history. That’s not entirely accurate, according to Spitz.

Yes, Richards came up with the licks for “Rocks Off,” “Happy” and “Tumbling Dice.” But it’s equally true that a strung-out Richards missed myriad recording sessions, invited dealers, hangers-on and other distractions to Nellcôte, and repeatedly failed to turn up to write with Jagger. Far from completing the album in the druggy haze of a French basement, the band spent six months on overdubs at Sunset Sound in Los Angeles, where Jagger contributed many of his vocals.

Beatles vs. Stones

One of the more interesting themes Spitz develops is the symbiotic relationship between the Beatles and Stones, with the Fab Four mostly overshadowing them — until they didn’t.

John Lennon and Paul McCartney wrote “I Wanna Be Your Man” and gave it to the Stones, whose 1963 rendition, with Jones on slide guitar, became the group’s first UK Top 20 hit. The Lennon-McCartney songwriting partnership inspired Jagger and Richards to begin penning their own songs. In early 1964, the Beatles came to the U.S. for the first time, making television history with their appearance on “The Ed Sullivan Show” and playing Carnegie Hall. A few months later, the Stones kicked off their inaugural American tour at the Swing Auditorium in San Bernardino. In 1967, the Beatles released “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” a psychedelic masterpiece. The Stones responded with “Their Satanic Majesties Request,” a psychedelic mess.

As the Beatles began to splinter, Spitz writes, the Stones sharpened their focus. The band released “Beggars Banquet” in late 1968 and “Let It Bleed” the following year, albums every bit as innovative and visionary as “The White Album” and “Abbey Road.” For the first time, the two groups stood as equals.

When the Beatles broke up in 1970, the Stones kept rolling. With Jones replaced by virtuoso guitarist Mick Taylor — whose fluid, melodic style served as a tasty foil to Richards — they produced what many consider their finest works, “Sticky Fingers” and “Exile on Main Street.” More impressively, the band, with Taylor’s successor, Ronnie Wood, has continued to dazzle audiences with incendiary live shows, touring as recently as 2024 behind the late-career triumph “Hackney Diamonds.” The Beatles, by contrast, retired from the road in 1966 and devoted their energies to the studio.

Hundreds of books have been written about the Rolling Stones, but few sparkle quite like Spitz’s. For anyone who loves or even likes the Stones, it’s indispensable.

Like most of the band’s biographers, Spitz gives short shrift to the post-“Exile” period after 1972. He curtly dismisses 2005’s strong “A Bigger Bang” and 2016’s “Blue & Lonesome,” a back-to-basics album of blues covers, as “adequate endeavors that signaled a band living on borrowed time.” That critique is both off target and under-developed. Spitz ignores the band’s legendary live album, “Brussels Affair,” recorded in 1973, or why the band waited decades before officially releasing it.

These are small quibbles. Spitz has written a book worthy of its 704-page length; another 50 or so pages covering the later years would have made it even stronger. To quote the Rolling Stones: “I know it’s only rock ‘n roll, but I like it, like it, yes, I do.”

Marc Ballon, a former Times, Forbes and Inc. Magazine reporter, teaches an advanced writing class at USC. He lives in Fullerton.

Movie Reviews

FILM REVIEW: ROSE OF NEVADA – Joyzine

Published

12 hours ago

April 19, 2026

Press Room

‘4’, the opening track on Richard D James’ (Aphex Twin) self titled 1996 album is a piece of music that beautifully balances the chaotic with the serene, the oppressive and the freeing. It’s a trick that James has pulled off multiple times throughout his career and it is a huge part of what makes him such an iconic and influential artist. Many people have laid the “next Aphex Twin” label on musicians who do things slightly different and when you actually hear their music you realise that, once again, the label is flawed and applied with a lazy attitude. Why mention this? Well, it turns out we’ve been looking for James’ heir apparent in the wrong artform. We’ve so zoned in on music that we’ve not noticed that another Celtic son of Cornwall is rewriting an art form with that highwire balancing act between chaos and beauty. That artist is writer, director and composer Mark Jenkin who over his last two feature films has announced himself as an idiosyncratic voice who is creating his very own language within the world of cinema. Jenkin’s films are often centred around coastal towns or islands and whilst they are experimental or even unsettling, there is always a big heart at the centre of the narrative. A heart that cares about family, tradition, culture, and the pull of ‘home’. Even during the horror of 2022’s brilliant Enys Men you were anchored by the vulnerability and determination of its main protagonist.

This month sees the release of Jenkin’s latest feature film, Rose of Nevada, which is set in a fractured and diminished Cornish coastal town. One day the fishing boat of the film’s title arrives back in harbour after being missing for thirty years. The boat is unoccupied. And frankly that is all the information you are going to get because to discuss any more plot would be unfair on you and disrespectful to Jenkin and the team behind the film. You the viewer should be the one who decides what it is about because thematically there are so many wonderful threads to pull on. This writer’s opinions on what it is about have ranged from a theme of sacrifice for the good of a community to the conflict within when part of you wants to run away from your roots whilst the other half longs to stay and be a lifelong part of its tapestry. Is it about Brexit? Could be. Is it about our own relationships with time and our curation of memory? Could be. Is it about both the positives and negatives of nostalgia? Could be. As a side note, anyone in their mid-40s, like me, who came of age in the 1990s will certainly find moments of warm recognition. Is the film about ghosts and how they haunt families? Could be…I think you get the point.

The elements that make the film so well balanced between chaos and calm are many. It is there in the differing performances between the brilliant two lead actors George MacKay and Callum Turner. It is there in the sound design which fluctuates from being unbearably harsh and metallic, to lulling and warm. It is there in the editing where short, sharp close ups on seemingly unimportant factors are counterbalanced with shots that are held for just that little bit too long. For a film set around the sea, it is apt that it can make you feel like you’re rolling on a stomach churning storm one minute, or a calming low tide the next. Dialogue can be front and centre or blurred and buried under static. One shot is bathed in harsh sunlight whilst the next can be drowned in interior shadows.

Rose of Nevada is Mark Jenkin’s most ambitious film to date yet he has not lost a single iota of innovation, singularity of vision or his gift for telling the most human of stories. It is a film that will tell you different things each time you see it and whilst there are moments that can confuse or beguile, there is so much empathy and love that it can leave you crying tears of emotional understanding. It is chaotic. It is beautiful. It is life……

Rose of Nevada is released on the 24th April.

Mark Jenkin Instagram | Threads

Released through the BFI – Instagram | Facebook

Review by Simon Tucker

Keep up to date with all new content on Joyzine via our
Facebook | Bluesky | Instagram | Threads | Mailing List

Entertainment

Larry David discusses ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm,’ ‘Seinfeld’ legacies and new HBO series

Published

14 hours ago

April 19, 2026

Press Room

Larry David discusses ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm,’ ‘Seinfeld’ legacies and new HBO series

Inside the ornate Bovard Auditorium, Larry David kept a full audience in stitches as he discussed the creation and legacy of his improv hit, “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” which concluded in 2024 after 12 seasons.

In a conversation with Lorraine Ali — who wrote “No Lessons Learned: The Making of Curb Your Enthusiasm,” which retraces the show’s 24-year run with cast interviews, episode guides and behind-the-scenes material — David reflected on the separation between himself and the abrasive on-screen persona he adopted for more than two decades.

“I wish I was that Larry David,” he said.

David spoke about the outrageous audition process for “Curb,” wherein actors tried to navigate a brief written scenario without any dialogue to guide them as David lambasted them in character. Out of this process came iconic one-liners and beloved characters, such as Leon, played by J.B. Smoove.

“People bring out certain things, and when I would act with them, some of them would make me seem funny,” David said. “I go, ‘Oh, that’s good — let’s give him a part.’”

David cited “Palestinian Chicken” as one of his favorite episodes of the show. In the episode, David is caught between a delicious new Palestinian chicken restaurant, a Palestinian girlfriend and an outraged inner circle of Jewish friends.

He also spoke briefly about his upcoming episodic HBO series, “Life, Larry and the Pursuit of Happiness,” a historical spoof that will retrace United States history for the country’s 250th founding anniversary. The series will premiere on Aug. 7.

“A lot of wigs, costumes, beards — fake beards,” David said. “Nothing worse than fake beards.”

The controversial ending of “Seinfeld,” which David co-wrote with comedian Jerry Seinfeld, was polarizing among fans when it was released, David said. After a recent rewatch, however, David said he thought it was “pretty good,” to a round of applause from the audience.

Near the end of the panel, an audience member asked a question some definitely had on their mind: Will “Seinfeld” ever get a reunion?

“No,” David replied without missing a beat.