Yes, I Will Be Commenting On Globes

33 Comments »

33 Responses to “Yes, I Will Be Commenting On Globes”

1. Joe Leydon says:

   January 16, 2005 at 8:08 pm

   Did I fall alseep or something, or were the Supporting awards not given out during the three-hour broadcast?
2. garytheretard says:

   January 16, 2005 at 8:12 pm

   im just gonna say that was fairly all over the place, which i guess is better than the alternative. nice to see everything (almost) come home with a win. the closer wins deeply surprise, if not disturb me.
3. garyagain says:

   January 16, 2005 at 8:13 pm

   forgot to mention, these awards are prolly paid off, but its great to see that everyones paying this time rather than just mirimax
4. JoeLeydon says:

   January 16, 2005 at 8:19 pm

   Ooops. Looks like I missed the Support awards in the first few minutes of the program. Never mind.
5. Lota says:

   January 16, 2005 at 8:49 pm

   two actors win for the ‘cold’est-feeling story of the year, Closer, which was a shock (lost money in a bet now) as well as the comment by Owen that it would increase Revenue! (there was alot of future ‘stumping’…Kate Hudson being introduced as the star of Skeleton Key etc). Also a pleasant shock for the Sea Inside, but alas not for Javier, although it was an award for the ladies when the camera lit upon him numerous times in the broadcast.
   Teri Hatcher and Marc Cherry tie for the Sally Field honorary “you really like me!” award…and I was glad.
   sad thing is, Motorcycle Diaries, Shaun of the dead and Rwanda will likely be all forgotten now and it will be a three-way battle to the death for Aviator, Sideways and Million-dollar baby.
6. Paul says:

   January 16, 2005 at 11:52 pm

   Not sure about Rwanda being forgotten. Seem to had the most support of the actors tonight. I can see It and Don pulling the SAG upset.
7. PeppersDad says:

   January 17, 2005 at 12:36 am

   It was a big night for The Aviator, Sideways, Million Dollar Baby, and, a bit surprisingly, Closer.
   The real loser was Finding Neverland, which was completely shut out. And while other films at least had rooting contingencies in the ballroom (e.g., Hotel Rwanda, Kinsey, Eternal Sunshine), FN didn’t get anything more than respectful applause for any of its nominees. If that audience was in any way representative of the Academy, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a big drop-off for FN when the Oscar noms are announced next week.
8. Dan R% says:

   January 17, 2005 at 4:58 am

   Is it just me, or did Foxx’s speech pretty much lock his Oscar win at this point? The Academy loves a gracious winner, and he hit all the right points. Put DiCaprio to shame, but quite honestly, how do you top that?
9. bicycle bob says:

   January 17, 2005 at 6:16 am

   the globes only added to the confusion and made the academy awards a real crap shoot. sideways, baby and aviator all with major awards here
10. KamikazeCamel says:

    January 17, 2005 at 6:49 am

    “The Academy loves a gracious winner, and he hit all the right points. Put DiCaprio to shame, but quite honestly, how do you top that?”
    How, exactly, did Jamie Foxx put DiCaprio to shame? I thought Leo’s speech was better. Foxx’s sounded like he was thanking everything and everyone possibly.
    I don’t understand how people can praise Foxx’s speech but then critisise Julia Roberts for her Erin Brockovich speech. They were basically the same. But, unlike Julia, Jamie’s career hasn’t been nearly as good and it’s not like he’s been nominated heaps of time and lost, its his first year. He just went on and on and on and on and…
11. KamikazeCamel says:

    January 17, 2005 at 6:52 am

    Oh, and what was with Annette Bening’s Mrs. Roboto speech?
12. Clay says:

    January 17, 2005 at 7:10 am

    Foxx’s speech was great. He was gracious, confident, funny and touching in the span of 3 minutes.
13. Paul says:

    January 17, 2005 at 9:40 am

    Yes Esotsm had a strong cheering section, as did Ray. Surpise at lack of love for Neverland and Johnny, felt sorry for poor Liam. Not overly strong for the Avitor or Leo through. Also sound like Kate and Staunton was up there with Hillary and Benning seem to have yes love.
14. Paul says:

    January 17, 2005 at 9:41 am

    I mean less love for Benning, not yes? Need more sleep.
15. bicycle bob says:

    January 17, 2005 at 10:59 am

    i can see portman winning but clive owen? come on. anytime ur the lead in the worst movie of the yr, king arthur, it should preclude u from winning any acting awards.
16. Joe Leydon says:

    January 17, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    Looks like the Golden Globes got thumped in the ratings. Not as badly as the People’s Choice Awards and the BFCA awards, mind you, but thumped nonetheless. Once again, I ask: Are people not tuning in because “awards fatigue” truly has set in? Or are people simply not turned on by this year’s crop of nominees?
17. Stella's Boy says:

    January 17, 2005 at 1:48 pm

    I think it has to do with the nominees this year. My sister and her friends (college freshmen) have not even heard of Sideways or Million Dollar Baby, nor Finding Neverland for that matter. They couldn’t tell you who’s in them or what they’re about. They’re somewhat familiar with The Aviator, but none of them has seen it or cares if they ever do. I think this is true of a lot of people of a variety of ages. Either they aren’t interested in many of the nominees or they haven’t even heard of them.
18. PeppersDad says:

    January 17, 2005 at 2:21 pm

    I agree that the low ratings have to do with the nominees. Part of the problem is the way so many of the Oscar movies get dumped into the marketplace at the end of the year. While this tactic may be successful at keeping those movies fresh in the memories of the Academy and other award-givers, it’s deadly for the shows’ ratings. The public for the most part simply hasn’t seen the nominated films (many of which haven’t even been released in their communities) and therefore has no rooting interest in the shows. But when you have a blockbuster like Titanic or Return of the King in the mix, viewers have a familiar film for which they can tune in and cheer on, and the ratings jump up accordingly.
    None of which is to say that any of these ratings factors influence voting.
19. Mark says:

    January 17, 2005 at 2:41 pm

    Sideways has been out for months. And Neverland has Depp at least. But Baby has some definate marketig issues.
20. Stella's Boy says:

    January 17, 2005 at 2:43 pm

    Sideways has been out for a while, but it’s in limited release and it has no recognizable stars. Many people literally have never heard of it, much less seen it.
21. L&DB says:

    January 17, 2005 at 2:54 pm

    Anyone dissing Clive Owen has to be either a fool
    or not well informed. Bringing up King Authur
    as the PENTULTIMATE moment in his career makes
    absolutely no sense. The guy has more screen
    presence than just about every actor out there.
    Him winning an award from that silly adult version
    of DAWSON’S CREEK makes me happy. Portman should
    be nomimated by the Academy however, for Garden
    State. If not; SHENANIGANS!
    The coldest movie of the year remains Sideways.
    Closer seems like a nice brunch after watching
    that void-fest. At least Virginia Madsen remains
    hot.
22. Mark says:

    January 17, 2005 at 3:15 pm

    The guy was the lead in King Arthur. It has to count for something here. How do you go from that to an Oscar?
23. Stella's Boy says:

    January 17, 2005 at 3:16 pm

    How do you go from Beverly Hills, 90210 to an Oscar?
24. Mark says:

    January 17, 2005 at 3:18 pm

    Wasn’t in the same year. We forgave Hillary after a few years for slumming.
25. Joe Leydon says:

    January 17, 2005 at 4:04 pm

    Wasn’t Hillary in “The Core” just a year before “M$B”?
26. PeppersDad says:

    January 17, 2005 at 4:15 pm

    There’s a perfect word for your line of reasoning here, Mark: Prejudice. Make no mistake about it – you are contending people should vote based on prejudice.
    How very Republican of you.
27. SaveFarris says:

    January 17, 2005 at 6:59 pm

    The same way you go from Booty Call to Oscar, I guess…
28. Mark says:

    January 17, 2005 at 6:59 pm

    Hilary had her Oscar before she did the Core. Artists can shill for a salary after they have their award. Its common knowledge.
29. PeppersDad says:

    January 17, 2005 at 7:03 pm

    I feel Mr Foxx deserved an Oscar for the great period film, Bait. It was unrivaled in sheer thrills and story. He gave a career making performance.
30. PeppersDad says:

    January 17, 2005 at 8:53 pm

    For the record, I did not submit the 7:03 posting. As long as David Poland allows people to submit fake postings under my name and e-mail address, I am going to have to post these corrections. Don’t blame me, blame them.
31. PeppersAuntFlo says:

    January 17, 2005 at 9:25 pm

    Yes, you did, hun. I saw you.
32. Dr. Johnny Fever says:

    January 18, 2005 at 10:39 am

    I have to concur with the assessment of Annette Benning’s speech. She appeared to be in the midst of a Xanax-fueled state of emotional flatline. Conversely, Hillary Swank needs to take the verbal fellatio down a few notches. How uncomfortable did Clint look when Swank was up there spewing about his cinematic genius? Take it down a notch, Hill.
33. mex says:

    January 18, 2005 at 4:01 pm

    I am from Mexico and CLOSER just arrived last friday, and I can´t believe people didn´t like it. It was stylish, with great (hard and different) performances, intimate and very, very clever. They are all oscar worthy.