2012 Golden Globes: Nikki's Non-Analysis

Deadline is, only for informational purposes, posting the 2012 Golden Globes nominations held by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association with the awards to be broadcast live on NBC on January 15th. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: it’s a completely meaningless awards show from a scandal-riddled organization on a network desperate for ratings. That’s why I opt out of analyzing the nominations every year: because the Golden Globes have zero integrity. Studios and networks who lavishly lobby the HFPA almost always score nominations. Stars win in direct correlation to their glamour quotient. Everything about the awards is geared towards hyping the media’s interest and the telecast’s ratings. And that includes inviting host Ricky Gervais, who can’t resist openly loathing the HFPA from the stage. No one will forget last year when he took the stage and was even more blasphemous towards the tarnished reputation of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association than I ever could be. (“I’d like to quash this ridiculous rumor going round that the only reason [The Tourist] was nominated was so the Hollywood Foreign Press could hang out with Johnny Depp and Angeline Jolie. That is rubbish. That is not the only reason. They also accepted bribes.”)

Not only have journalists like myself for years been attacking the Hollywood Foreign Press Association for its exclusionary membership policies and too-cozy relationship with studios and networks, but an Oscar-winning documentary director (Vikram Jayanti, in his 2004 film The Golden Globes: Hollywood’s Dirty Little Secret) has called the group a bunch of “freeloaders” who know more about hors d’oeuvres than auteurs and select winners based on “who kisses butt best”. The HFPA has been accused in a lawsuit filed by its former publicist (who for 17 years used to be paid to protect the group’s image) of accepting “payola” — like taking lavish gifts from studios in exchange for nominations — and other questionable business practices. Even though the charges are denied by the HFPA, the lawsuit alleges what we’ve all known: that the Golden Globes and the organization behind it have zero integrity.

Hollywood filmmakers and TV producers who lavishly lobby the HFPA almost always score nominations. Stars win in direct correlation to their glamour quotient. Everything about the awards is geared towards hyping the media’s interest and the telecast’s ratings. Even the small motley group of 85 mostly freelancers who belong to the HFPA won’t grant membership to the real foreign journalists at the prestige media outlets across the world. The HFPA clique doesn’t want to dilute the financial bonanza they receive from the studios and networks who arrange exclusive interviews about each year’s movies and TV shows. The organizations who put on the Golden Globes — NBC and Dick Clark Productions — could clean up the HFPA but choose not to. That’s because everybody is making gobs of money, including the HFPA, which pockets an estimated $30 million in broadcast fees for the awards show. Instead, the entire entertainment industry props up this pathetic broadcast, which is seen as a night-long marketing tool. And FYI: only once in the last seven years has the winner of one of the Golden Globe best film prizes gone on to win Best Picture at the Oscars (2008’s Slumdog Millionaire), though that came after an 8-year Globe/Oscar winning streak. Last year’s top drama Globe went to The Social Network. Oops. Then again, let’s not forget that, in 1968, the Federal Communications Commission accused the HFPA of misleading the public as to how the winners were determined, alleging that Globe winners were determined by lobby and by who would show up to receive the award rather than blind poll. NBC subsequently refused to broadcast the awards until 1974.

So I refuse to treat these nominations with any seriousness. And if you don’t want that, then for crissakes stop reading me… But my Deadline colleagues will analyze today’s nominations. The only reason I can think of to tune in to the Golden Globes is for the jokes. Over the years, Jack Nicholson has mooned the audience, Jim Carrey has talked out of his butt, Christine Lahti was locked in the bathroom, and other unscripted weirdness occurs at this intimate dinner. Including 1982’s low point when Pia Zadora’s husband bought her best “New Star Of The Year”. Perhaps Christian Bale summed it up best when he took the stage at last year’s Golden Globes and humiliated the HFPA in his acceptance speech. “I never really knew who those guys were. I’d always leave the press junkets going, ‘Who are those oddball characters in that room?'”

  1. “it’s a completely meaningless awards show from a scandal-riddled organization on a network desperate for ratings.”

    Maybe that’s why its so much fun to watch.

  2. Why do people think of the GG as something of pre-Oscar? It is not. Like in 2010, when THE SECRET IN THEIR EYES got the best foreign picture Award without even being nominated for a GG in the same category. Pfff! We call those guys The Dinosurs. The youngest one must be 88-years-old.

  3. The HFPA is a sham and it’s laughable how NBC promotes the Golden Globes as if they’re as prestigious as the Oscars. Yet the awards ceremony does have a way of bringing out the bizarre or unintentionally funny that makes it always worth a look.

  4. I don’t think it just is the GG’s either, I think every one of these award nominations are bought and paid for by the studio’s or the other deep pockets in Hollywood, such as the “money men”…the public is the one that makes or breaks a movie, and when a movie can’t make bank or profit, it still seems to get nominations. All of those nominated are the same few that get nominations every single year. George Clooney, Brad Pitt, etc, and yet their movies aren’t making profits at the box office. In the Land of Blood and Honey nominated for a Foreign Language film, when it is labeled as a USA film, was “written”, directed by an American, and also produced/distributed by American companies? So does that mean next year, Brad Pitts movie WWZ, can get a nomination the best foreign film, due to its being filmed in the UK, Budapest, etc? Please explain that one to me.

    1. You need to recheck your box office numbers, in terms of Clooney. His films do make profits at the box office. They might not be #1 films in any week, but they’re made economically, and they make significant profit. In fact, his model ought to be a lesson to all

    2. While they may not always have huge hits, Pitt and Clooney’s films consistently make a profit…At the same time, profit doesn’t mean a quality film. By your standards, the Transformers and Twilight should be nominated.

    3. It will be interesting to see if AMPAS allows “In the Land of Blood and Honey” to be nominated as Best Foreign Language Film, since they twice disqualified Joshua Marston’s films from this category, because he is an American director and his films were produced by companies from countries other than each film’s respective country of record.

      Joshua Marston is relatively unknown, so his situation fell on deaf ears; will AMPAS use the same criteria for someone like Angelina Jolie?

  5. I agree with the sentiment, but your wording is imprecise. It dilutes the message. These awards are hardly “meaningless.” They might be a joke. Utterly corrupt. Anti-indicative of quality (but so are many awards, aren’t they?). But they mean an awful lot, to an awful lot of people (and companies). That’s why they spend lavishly on campaigns, and brag about them in advertisements, and make sure to attend, and throw enormous parties afterward. They’re worth huge box office dollars, and salary increases. They do, to some extent, influence later awards voters. They have meaning, even if the meaning is twisted and unfortunatel

  6. I’m not defending the globes, merely stating that almost every year the Oscars and Globes have split decisions on Best Drama/Best Picture, the Globes have picked the better movie. Some noteable examples: Social Network/King’s Speech, Brokeback Mountain/Crash, The Aviator/Million Dollar Baby

  7. Do you do analysis of the other awards? Maybe the Oscars but I’ve have yet to see one for all the other precursors.

    And while you might not be posting, your “deadline team”, ie, your other log-in account sure is.

  8. The Oscars were created by the studios for this very purpose – to publicize pictures and drive box office. All award shows to one extent or another serve this end. It’s been working for 80 years or so. HFPA is a bit more shameless/less slick about it. But then what do we expect from the Foreign Press (no offense guys – love ya – double air kiss).

  9. I agree with Patrick. All award shows are a joke including the Oscars. Even Oscars are always awarded to familiar faces and studios. Press bash Golden Globes because it is an easy target and praise all other stupid award shows including Oscars in spite of being not too different.

  10. These GG nominations are better then the SAG noms this year! I don’t really see how these are worse then any of the other awards.

    I think I’ll have to agree with Patrick….all awards are meaningless….but, the Golden Globes has the best show in my opinion and the best parties for sure! Can’t wait until January!

  11. the worst part of this is watching all of the media grovel and act like this is an important quality group bestowing a prestigious award and we have to listen to it over and over.

  12. As stated by several commenters, the GG are for sure bought and paid for, but no more than the Oscars. Any achievement that has to be “campaigned” for has no meaning and is reduced to silliness. These people who vote, also have memory spans of about 20 minutes. If a film is released early in the year, it’s like it doesn’t exist. So stupid.

    1. If this article made you a fan, I assume all the other articles covering what she decries as meaningless made you less of a fan. Can’t have it both ways.

  13. The fact that they’d nominate American Horror Story over Breaking Bad is proof enough that the Globes are a complete joke. AHS isn’t even FX’s best or second best show! that would be Justified and Sons of Anarchy.

  14. Of course the Globes choose the big names like Jeremy Irons, Steve Buscemi, Tina Fey, Zooey Deschanel, Alec Baldwin, David Duchovny, Matt LeBlanc, Tim Robbins over Kyle Chandler (he is eligible), John Hannah, Martha Plimpton, Joel McHale, Louie CK, Aaron Paul

    About the movie nominees, I’ve got no opinion since I didn’t see all those movies. But one thing is sure, Ryan Gosling in Crazy, Stupid, love should be closer to a Razzie than an Oscar.

  15. First, Nikki, you are my hero for this awesome tirade (I think it’s better than last year’s). I was having a shitty day but this cheered me up. Anything that I can post on Facebook can’t come close to the public bashing you continue to give the Globes. I love it.

    Yet again Michael Pitt’s epic performance as James Darmody gets overlooked by an awards show. Fuck the Golden Globes. I guess playing gay in a sitcom is considered harder than playing a war hero with a limp, that was a victim of incest in an hour long drama. For my money, Pitt’s performance has outdone just about anything television has seen before. Guess I should have learned long ago not to put faith in ANYTHING that Dan Snyder gets his hands on.

    1. Could not agree more on Michael Pitt.

      His performance as Jimmy Darmody was terrific.

      I don’t usually follow awards shows but I must say I am disappointed that he is not recognized in some way. From the pilot episode to the season 2 finale his character was the most interesting thing about the show. No disrespect to the other actors but he really stood out. He reminds me of a young Johnny Depp and we may look back at this Television performance as the start of big career.

  16. The globes are in line more with what audiences like. The oscars are about patting themselves on the back, which is fine but they are not allowed an attitude about it or the can just do it in private

  17. Comparing The Globes unfavorably to the Oscars is like comparing a street whore to someone who works for an escort service. They both do the same kind of work, and for the same industry. One is just a little more obvious about it.

Comments are closed.