More stories

  • in

    Jimmy Fallon Ribs Vivek Ramaswamy for Embracing Trump

    “Yep, Ramaswamy took the stage and praised Trump for eight minutes,” Fallon said. “Then he was, like, ‘Wait, Donald, this is your speech. Sorry!’”Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.‘Stop the Hug!’Vivek Ramaswamy dropped out of the 2024 presidential race on Monday after finishing fourth at the Iowa caucuses. The 38-year-old entrepreneur endorsed former President Donald Trump and supported him at a rally in New Hampshire on Tuesday.“Everyone was on the edge of their seat just to hear how Trump would pronounce Vivek Ramaswamy,” Jimmy Fallon said.“Yep, Ramaswamy took the stage and praised Trump for eight minutes. Then he was, like, ‘Wait, Donald, this is your speech. Sorry!’” — JIMMY FALLON“Vivek Ramaswamy announced this week that he was suspending his presidential campaign. He plans to return to his true passion, tearing down the teen rec center to build a shopping mall.” — SETH MEYERSAfter Ramaswamy ended his speech, he welcomed Trump to the stage with an awkward and lengthy embrace.“I didn’t know if they were hugging or burping each other.” — JIMMY FALLON“Stop the hug! Stop the hug!” — STEPHEN COLBERT“To be fair, that’s pretty much every embrace between a guy in his 30s and a guy in his 70s. It’s, like, ‘Hey, I don’t know what you’re doing. Are we hugging?’” — JIMMY FALLONThe Punchiest Punchlines (I-o-wanna Edition)“The big news today is the big news from Monday. Donald Trump won the Iowa caucus with 51 percent of the vote. Iowa: apparently, short for ‘I-o-wanna live in a democracy anymore.’” — STEPHEN COLBERT“So the DeSantis train is steaming on to New Hampshire, where he is currently polling at 5 percent. But don’t give up, Ron, because when asked which candidate they preferred, 2 percent refused to answer. If they’re ashamed to say it out loud, that’s a DeSantis voter.” — STEPHEN COLBERT“ABC and CNN decided to cancel their New Hampshire debate coverage because Trump and Nikki Haley said they would not attend. So, the good news is if you still want to hear two Republicans who will never be president argue about politics, you can always go visit your parents.” — JIMMY KIMMELThe Bits Worth WatchingThe “Ted Lasso” star Juno Temple talked about finding her Minnesota accent for the new season of “Fargo.”What We’re Excited About on Thursday NightThe singer-songwriter Sierra Ferrell will perform on Thursday’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”Also, Check This OutFatima Robinson, foreground, on the set of “The Color Purple,” with Fantasia Barrino-Taylor, in white, and Oprah Winfrey.Eli Adé/Warner Bros.“The Color Purple” choreographer Fatima Robinson realized a lifelong dream with her work on the new musical film adaptation of Alice Walker’s 1982 novel. More

  • in

    Tom Shales Took TV Seriously Even When Its Creators Didn’t

    Shales admired nothing so much as ambition, but he also managed the feat of having high standards about lowbrow things.“How-word Co-sell — you heard the bell and you came out talking.”The television critic Tom Shales began his 1978 essay with a pitch-perfect impression of his subject, capturing the melodrama, punchy cadence and flamboyant volubility of the most famous sportscaster of his era. He goes on to mock Howard Cosell’s hyperbole and penchant for mistakes while still convincing you of his specific greatness as a television virtuoso. In criticism as nuanced as it is satirical, Shales described the musical quality of Cosell’s voice as “virtually visual,” transforming the crowd of an arena into “a manageable, living room form.”In an argument that could be made today about Stephen A. Smith, the critic locates precisely how a broadcaster became the main event.When people ask what critics inspired me to become one, I tend to mention Pauline Kael and Kenneth Tynan. It’s honest, though not as much as a critic should be. They are prestigious names, celebrated ones who championed legendary artists. But the first critic I ever loved reading was Tom Shales, who began his collection of essays “On the Air!“ by proclaiming his affection for McDonald’s, the smell of Right Guard deodorant and television.Shales, who died last week, had one of the most impressive careers of any cultural journalist of his lifetime. Along with co-writing (with James Andrew Miller) “Live From New York,” the oral history of “Saturday Night Live,” an essential part of the bookcase for anyone who cares about pop culture, he turned The Washington Post, a newspaper best known for its political coverage, into the home of the most influential voice on television of the 1980s and ’90s.Arriving right before the golden age for the medium, he dominated his beat, not just winning a Pulitzer Prize but also doing it while pumping out hundreds of stories a year of a startling range, covering “60 Minutes” with as much insight as he had into Rodney Dangerfield. He was as gifted doing the deadline work of capturing the horror of the space shuttle Challenger explosion as he was at teasing out startlingly candid interviews with careful stars like Johnny Carson and Steve Martin.Shales did not condescend to his thumbs-up-or-down responsibilities. You knew where he stood. He understood that part of the job was to be engaging, and his writing crackled with wit — it was scathing, conversational, sometimes unfair but never dishonest. And yet, his greatest legacy is how he championed television when that was a lonely pursuit.When Shales started his career in the late 1970s, a critic treating television seriously was unusual and refreshing. The “idiot box” was considered a wasteland if not a scourge. Shales didn’t dismiss these critiques. He engaged with them. He admired nothing so much as ambition but also managed the feat of having high standards about lowbrow things.The subtext of so much of his early writing was an argument for the potential of television as art, comfort, cure for loneliness, creator of meaning. He made these points explicitly but also implicitly, in the way he wrote, say, a fascinating 1987 essay about the growing visual ambition of the medium. He didn’t cite only Michael Mann’s direction of “Miami Vice” but also the gonzo monkey cams from “Late Night With David Letterman” and the rise of MTV. “I feel grateful not only that I’m alive in the age of television but that unlike a lot of people I know, I can still find it on occasion, marvelous,” he wrote. “I can be delighted and astonished and exhilarated by it, and appalled.”Shales clearly saw these reactions coming from the same place. His vicious pan of the sitcom “Gimme a Break!” (Sample line: “If I thought television could get substantially worse than this, I am not sure I would have the courage or desire ever to turn the set on again”) emerged from the same place as a rave of Jean Stapleton’s Edith Bunker: He had not only a sense that this stuff does matter but also an impatience with artists and viewers and especially executives who didn’t act like it.This is a valuable quality in a critic. Besides reflecting high standards, it is dramatic. Shales made whatever he wrote about seem to have stakes, even if it was “Family Feud.” And that in turn made you care about game show hosts and comics and news anchors in a way you didn’t before, even if he panned them.When critics die, people tend to point to the things they got right or wrong, as if that were the measure. It isn’t, though a case on that count could be made for Shales. He championed “Cheers,” “Twin Peaks,” “The Sopranos.” He applied critical rigor to comedy specials when there weren’t many, and he understood early that whatever you think about “Full House,” it works.Unlike Kael or Tynan, Shales wasn’t at his best beating the drum for or against something. All his work maintained a skeptical, knowing, light comic style. He always had more passion for the form than for any artist in it. This could lead to brutal honesty. He annually mocked Kathie Lee Gifford’s holiday special with sadistic glee, and while I would like to defend his famous pan of “Late Night With Conan O’Brien” (which even the talk show host admitted decades later was accurate), its dismissive harshness blinds him to the peculiar ambition the green host displayed. (He eventually changed his mind and wrote a rave about O’Brien years later.)Brutal negative criticism is now out of fashion, but it’s too much a part of the human experience to be killed off. It just migrated online. Less casual cruelty is a good thing, but there are real risks to this new politeness. A critic is a kind of reporter, one whose beat requires pacing between mind and gut, filing dispatches filtered through an intellectual apparatus. Once you stop reporting what is there, you cease being useful. Shales never did.When I was growing up in Washington D.C., I didn’t realize my luck that the most influential criticism on late night television was being done in my local paper. Shales loved David Letterman and that surely rubbed off on me. I never met Shales, but when I thanked him for reviewing my biography of David Letterman, he was kind enough to regale me with some war stories, and this advice: “Try not to let The Times suffocate you.”Critics rarely end their careers well. Perhaps this will be of some solace to wounded artists. Shales felt he was pushed out at The Washington Post — he told me (plausibly) that he was a victim of the “cyber apocalypse.” But I didn’t find his message to be bitter, or at least not only that.Criticism is among other things an act of vulnerability. Regularly putting your views out into the world to be picked apart, doing the intrepid thinking, fast writing and enemy-making that is a part of the job while holding onto your sensitivity, curiosity and confidence — it’s harder than it looks. Sometimes you fail or, worse, cut corners. But what I took Tom Shales to mean, in his advice to me, was that the thing you must protect, what requires expending courage on, is your own voice. It’s good advice, worth passing on. More

  • in

    ‘For all Mankind’ Ends Its Greediest Season

    In an interview, the showrunners discuss the space drama’s just-concluded fourth season, in which exploration gave way to exploitation.This interview includes spoilers for Season 4 of “For All Mankind.”After beginning its story in 1969 and working its way through the following decades, “For All Mankind” reached the year 2003 in its fourth season. At one point, President Al Gore is …Wait, what?Set in an alternate universe, this Apple TV+ series is predicated on the idea that a Soviet cosmonaut became the first man on the moon. The event had a butterfly effect with consequences that included an accelerated conquest of space, the continued existence of the Soviet Union and, yes, a President Gore.Season 4, which concluded last week, toggled between Happy Valley, a Mars base dedicated largely to mining, and Earth, where Americans and Soviets enjoy a distrustful relationship despite being partners in space ventures. The oldest survivors of the previous seasons are Ed (Joel Kinnaman), now an astronaut elder working on Mars for the private company Helios; his former colleague Danielle (Krys Marshall), who leads Happy Valley; and Margo (Wrenn Schmidt), a high-ranking NASA administrator who ended up in the Soviet Union and is roped into that country’s space program.The major question of Season 4 is: What happens when exploitation, in every sense of the word, replaces exploration as a motivation? “To me there’s a little bit of greed that came in this season,” the showrunner and executive producer Ben Nedivi said. “Mars is no longer just about astronauts and engineers anymore — we need labor, people who build things.”His fellow showrunner and executive producer Matt Wolpert emphasized that a different type of character was being thrust into space. “We wanted someone who hadn’t dreamed from early childhood of being an astronaut, someone who was looking to make a living,” he said of the newcomer Miles (Toby Kebbell), a wily mechanic always trying to make an extra buck. “There would be conflict,” Wolpert added, “between the way different people define their jobs in this very cramped environment.”In a joint video call, Nedivi and Wolpert talked about the season’s main story lines, Danielle’s fate and the importance of realistic science-fiction aesthetics. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    After Five Seasons of ‘Fargo,’ Noah Hawley Is Still Rooting for America

    In an interview, Hawley discussed darkness, putting nipple rings on Jon Hamm and using “Fargo” as a vehicle for stories that champion decency.This interview includes spoilers for the fifth season of “Fargo.”When Noah Hawley debuted the FX series “Fargo” a decade ago, it wasn’t yet clear that instead of simply telling a longer version of the 1996 Oscar-winning film by Joel and Ethan Coen, he was going to spin the brothers’ entire oeuvre into a thread that examines modern American life while also reconfiguring a few other cultural touchstones. With the fifth season’s conclusion on Tuesday, Hawley has doubled down on “Wizard of Oz” references, turned Rush and Britney Spears songs into anthems of toxic masculinity, and used Tim Burton’s “The Nightmare Before Christmas” and John Hughes’s “Home Alone” as plot devices.The canvas is still a 10-episode arc, and the paints are, as usual, a large cast of marquee stars and scene-stealing character actors. But this time around, Hawley has used the Coens’ original tale — a woman (Juno Temple) being kidnapped in a plot orchestrated by her husband — as a lens on patriarchy, domestic abuse and the very American trait of being in debt. The season also has 16th-century sin-eating practices; Jon Hamm as a misogynistic Constitutional sheriff with nipple rings; and Dave Foley as an eye-patched lawyer for one of the biggest donors to the Federalist Society, played by Jennifer Jason Leigh.“The feedback I kept getting from FX about the scripts was that this was our funniest season,” Hawley said last week in a telephone interview. “Then, of course, when you put it up on its feet, it’s the story of a woman who’s abducted with domestic violence undertones.”These are edited excerpts from the conversation.This season of “Fargo” felt much darker than the others, which are already dark. Did you feel that while you were writing it?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    Late Night Laments Donald Trump’s Sweeping Victory in Iowa

    “Even though he barely spent any time in Iowa, it somehow made voters love him more,” Jimmy Kimmel said. “It’s the same strategy he used raising Eric and Don Jr.”Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.‘Yuge’ in IowaThe Iowa caucuses took place on Monday, with former President Donald Trump winning 51 percent of the vote and finishing far ahead of his Republican opponents.“If you’ve ever wondered what is the polar opposite of M.L.K. Day, it is the Iowa Republican caucus,” Jimmy Kimmel joked on Tuesday.“Even though he barely spent any time in Iowa, it somehow made voters love him more. It’s the same strategy he used raising Eric and Don Jr.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Trump won 98 of Iowa’s 99 counties. Apparently, the 99th county got confused and voted for ‘Succession.’” — JIMMY FALLON“But Trump got 51 percent of the vote in Iowa. And even though it doesn’t mean much — you know, in 2016, Ted Cruz won the Iowa caucus, and now he lives at the bottom of an aquarium.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Experts have been saying for months that Trump would win over 50 percent of the vote. These Iowa caucuses were the political version of ‘This could have been an email.’” — JIMMY FALLONThe Punchiest Punchlines (Arctic Blitz Edition)“You know, 80 percent of the country right now is in the grip of what they call an arctic blast, which is a very dangerous weather pattern not to be confused with arctic blitz, which is a wiper fluid-colored flavor of Gatorade.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“The entire country is getting hit with an arctic blast. It is so cold, in Times Square the cooks over at Bubba Gump are warming their hands in the gumbo.” — JIMMY FALLON“Today, I tipped a kid who was shoveling outside 30 Rock, and he said, ‘Thanks, Mr. Fallon.’ I said, ‘No, thank you, Mr. Ramaswamy.’” — JIMMY FALLON“It’s so cold, Ron DeSantis is burning books just for the heat.” — JIMMY FALLONThe Bits Worth WatchingNicki Minaj took “The Colbert Questionert” on Tuesday’s “Late Show.What We’re Excited About on Wednesday NightReneé Rapp, a star in the “Mean Girls” remake and this week’s “Saturday Night Live” musical guest, will sit down with Seth Meyers on Wednesday.Also, Check This OutJune Carter Cash, the subject of the documentary “June.”Don Hunstein/Sony Music Entertainment/Paramount+The filmmaker Kristen Vaurio leans on archival footage for “June,” her new documentary about the country music legend June Carter Cash. More

  • in

    ‘Fargo’ Season 5 Finale Recap: Debts

    Dot sees an opportunity. Ole Munch sees an account that needs settling.Season 5, Episode 10: ‘Bisquik’The show may be called “Fargo,” but setting aside the Upper Midwest setting and colloquialisms, this fifth season has been more in conversation with a different Coen Brothers thriller, “No Country for Old Men,” their faithful rendering of the Cormac McCarthy novel. From the beginning, Roy Tillman has served as a malevolent twist on Tommy Lee Jones’s Ed Tom Bell in “No Country,” both hailing from a long line of county sheriffs patrolling arid stretches of countryside occasionally pocked with outlaws.Bell worries about an encroachment of evil that his predecessors never faced and that he feels increasingly powerless to contain. Tillman is that evil, a Black hat with a badge.And then there’s Ole Munch, a contract killer who doubles as an ageless arbiter of justice, impossible to outwit and nearly as difficult to mollify. He has been the season’s answer to Anton Chigurh, the mirthless and equally style-challenged assassin of “No Country.” Both cling rigidly to codes that seem obscure to the mortals they hold in judgment. Both seem part of the American landscape, manifested rather than born. But Munch has shown the capacity for fairness and mercy, and his 500-year journey from Wales to chili night is rooted in humility. In a season where debt — and its flip-side, forgiveness — has been at the front of the creator Noah Hawley’s mind, Munch is always acutely aware of what’s owed.Munch’s appearance in the Lyon house at the end of this moving final episode stands in contrast to the scene in which Chigurh waits for Carla Jean Moss (Kelly Macdonald) at her home weeks after killing her husband, Llewelyn (Josh Brolin). Chigurh had threatened to kill Carla Jean if Llewelyn didn’t surrender the cash, and now he has come to make good on his promise, even though Llewelyn is already dead and she has nothing to do with any of this sordid business.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    Tom Shales, TV Critic Both Respected and Feared, Dies at 79

    An incisively funny Washington Post columnist, he earned nicknames like Terrible Tom and had the clout to make or break shows.Tom Shales, the Pulitzer Prize-winning television critic for The Washington Post whose scalpel-sharp dissections of shows he deemed dead on arrival earned him nicknames like the Terror of the Tube, as well as a reputation for the power to make or break shows, died on Saturday in Alexandria, Va. He was 79.James Andrew Miller, a longtime collaborator and friend, said he died in a hospice facility from complications of Covid.Despite toiling in a political town far removed from the coastal capitals of the entertainment industry, Mr. Shales wielded enormous influence during his three-decade career, starting in 1977, as The Post’s chief television critic.Those whose fortunes were tied to the small screen considered him both a kingmaker and a high executioner in an era when network television’s hold on American culture was so tight as to be almost crushing.“He has been called brilliant, thoughtful, incisive and screamingly funny,” Time magazine observed in 1981, christening him “Terrible Tom, the TV Tiger.” “Also, vicious, infuriating, cruel and unfair. NBC president Fred Silverman no longer returns his calls. His thrice-weekly Washington Post TV column, ‘On the Air,’ syndicated in 59 other newspapers, causes teeth-gnashing in Hollywood and heartburn in Manhattan’s network headquarters.”To celebrate Mr. Shales’s 25th anniversary at the newspaper, The Post’s publisher, Katharine Graham, arranged a party at her house that was attended by the likes of Dan Rather, Connie Chung and Conan O’Brien. Ms. Graham explained the star-studded turnout in a single word, according to a report in Washingtonian magazine: “Fear.”No wonder. Delivering prose so colorful it seemed to be written in neon, he had the power to devastate.In a 1987 review of “The Morning Program,” CBS’s latest attempt to compete with the “Today” show, he wrote that “some TV shows seem to call less for a review than an exorcism.”“Watching it was like waking up and finding the house overrun with last night’s party guests,” he continued, “most of them stewed to the gills and gabby as all get-out.”In a 2005 column about ABC’s “Grey’s Anatomy,” he wrote that it seemed like little more than an assemblage of “scenes from medical shows of the past already restaged ad infinitum and ad nauseam,” and that it was “a ‘new’ show only in the sense that Dr. Frankenstein’s monster was a new man.”After he teed off in 2003 on the Fox teenage drama “The O.C.” as a “moody, moon-faced trifle,” the show fired back with a hospital scene featuring a patient named Tom Shales, who is incontinent. “I consider it an honor,” Mr. Shales said in an interview with the Page Six gossip section of The New York Post. “It’s a TV critic’s only shot at immortality.”He was a magnet for furious phone calls from sitcom stars and network titans. “So-and-so would call, and he’d tell me, ‘Get on the other line, this is going to be good,’” Mr. Miller, who worked on the television team at the Post with Mr. Shales in the 1980s, said in a phone interview. “This person literally would be just cursing him out for 20 minutes, and he’d be sitting there trimming his fingernails. If you hooked him up to an EKG, there would be no movement whatsoever.”While Mr. Shales’s reviews could be acidic, his indignant salvos came from a place of passion. In a 1989 interview with the public radio host Terry Gross, he recalled his thoughts as a child when his family finally got a 14-inch RCA set in a mahogany console: “This was a miracle, this was the Second Coming and nirvana all rolled into one.”At 13, he wrote a school paper outlining the steps he planned to take to become a television columnist when he grew up. “He formed this bond with the medium so early,” Mr. Miller said. “It was the love of his life.”When Mr. Shales would do one of his brilliant takedowns, Mr. Miller said, “he wasn’t trying to destroy the show or the writers.”“He was just angry because he knew it could be better. He had no patience for people who were phoning it in or reaching for the lowest common denominator.”The shows he loved, he loved. In 1990, he called “Twin Peaks,” the director David Lynch’s eerie and unsettling small-town drama, “a captivating blend of the existential and the pulpy, the surreal and the neo-real, the grim and the farcical.” “Twin Peaks,” he added, “is new age music for the eyes.”In a 2006 column, he wrote that David Simon’s gritty HBO crime drama “The Wire” “might be the most authentic epic ever seen on television.” “You go to ‘The Wire’ not to escape,” he added, “but to be immersed in a world where madness and sanity can seem interchangeable.”As Mr. Shales told Time: “People who respect TV are the ones I respect. It’s the ones who wipe their feet on it whom I probably write nasty things about.”Thomas William Shales was born on Nov. 3, 1944, in Elgin, Ill., one of three children of Clyde Shales, who ran a towing service and body shop, and Hulda (Reko) Shales, who managed a clothing store.He served as co-editor of his high school newspaper and went on to become the editor in chief of the campus newspaper at American University in Washington, where he graduated with a degree in journalism in 1968.His first full-time job in journalism was at The D.C. Examiner, a free tabloid, where his verbal gymnastics caught the attention of editors at The Post, who hired him in 1972 as a general-assignment reporter. Focusing his sights on television and popular culture, he became the chief TV critic five years later.In addition to his Post columns, Mr. Shales published a number of books, including an oral history of “Saturday Night Live,” written with James Andrew Miller. He won a Pulitzer Prize for criticism in 1988.The job landed him in the middle of swirling controversies about the toxic state of television, with its blood-soaked detective dramas, sensationalized news shows and sex-addled sitcoms — which, in the view of many pundits, were a source of cultural rot.Mr. Shales was all too happy to wade in up to his thighs. In response to a spate of leering television movies at the dawn of the 1980s involving torture, child molestation and teenage prostitution, he wrote that “watching prime-time TV is like being trapped in Sleaze City’s tackiest honky-tonk.”“One gets a warped and depressing view,” he added, “of what it means to be alive.”His sharp-eyed takes won him a Pulitzer for criticism in 1988.While his Post column never waned in influence, Mr. Shales, who was making more than $300,000 a year thanks to his Post salary and his syndication revenues, took a buyout from The Post in 2006 after a management transition. He continued to contribute columns under contract until 2010.In addition to his Post columns, he published a number of books, including two oral histories with Mr. Miller: “Live From New York,” a history of Saturday Night Live” (2002), and “Those Guys Have All the Fun,” about ESPN” (2011).Mr. Shales, who never married or had children, leaves no immediate survivors.Having spent years in his Washington Post office with three televisions flickering nonstop, and with another three televisions glowing at his home in McLean, Va., Mr. Shales told Time that sometimes even he tuned out on the programming at hand. “After all,” he said, “only about 2 percent of what’s on is worth really watching.” More

  • in

    4.3 Million Watched the Emmys, a New Low

    The Emmys had a lot going against it, including a ceremony delayed months by the Hollywood strikes, and stiff competition from other events.The Emmy Awards ratings collapse continues.An audience of 4.3 million people watched the Emmys on Fox on Monday night, the lowest viewership since records have been kept, according to preliminary Nielsen data. In 2022, the Emmys garnered 5.9 million viewers, the previous low.The ratings have put the Emmys dangerously close to the Tony Awards, which for decades has drawn a significantly smaller audience. But in June, 4.3 million people tuned into the Tonys, an increase from its previous ceremony.The final Emmy numbers, which will be released on Wednesday, will probably increase somewhat from the preliminary figures.The Emmys had a lot going against it. The ceremony had been delayed by four months because of last year’s screenwriter and actor strikes, the most significant postponement for the event in more than two decades.Indeed, the competition was stiff on Monday night. The Emmys went head-to-head against a Monday night football playoff game and the Iowa caucuses.The football game, which featured the Philadelphia Eagles and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, drew more than 28 million viewers, according to Nielsen. Roughly 4.7 million people tuned into the three big cable news networks between 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. for Iowa returns, according to the preliminary Nielsen data.The Emmys also faced competition from other award shows. All the big winners on Monday night — “Succession,” “The Bear” and “Beef” — had been honored at the Golden Globes last week, and the Critics Choice Awards on Sunday night.Yet the Emmys even had trouble holding its own against a rerun of a network television show. A repeat of “NCIS” on CBS at 8 p.m. on Monday night — which had the benefit of a lead-in from another playoff football game — drew 4.9 million viewers, according to preliminary Nielsen data.Most other major award shows — despite lower audience figures compared with a decade ago — have seen ratings rebound recently. Oscar ratings have ticked up two years in a row. So have the Grammys. Even the scandal-plagued Golden Globes saw a big increase in audience last week.The Emmys telecast, which was broadcast on Fox and hosted by Anthony Anderson, cannot be blamed. The ceremony got generally warm reviews, with critics appreciating the number of cast reunions — including “Cheers,” “Ally McBeal” and “Grey’s Anatomy” — that were staged in honor of the 75th Anniversary of the awards.The Emmys will not be gone long. The next ceremony will be in September, and broadcast on ABC. More