The Edge of the Frame

Well, my first reaction to the Golden Globes was, of course, uproarious laughter. HFPA, you crazy bastards, you. Every year, when I make my predictions out, I actually imagine that they will make rational decisions, decisions actually catered to how good a film is rather than how many celebrities they can kiss ass to and cram onto a red carpet. Then, every year, I have to give a little giggle and remember who I’m dealing with.

Let’s actually go through the good, first, because believe it or not, there is some. The HFPA actually showed more love for “The Social Network” than I thought that they would. 6 nominations, tying the second largest amount for the year, including what I believe to be an Oscar nomination-sealing nod to Jesse Eisenberg, as well as much deserved recognition to Trent Reznor and Atticus Finch for their unorthodox and compelling score. I do believe that “The King’s Speech” will take down this particular Best Picture award, due to the HFPA’s penchant for grandiose over edgy (“The Aviator” over “Million Dollar Baby,” which I was actually happy about, “Atonement” over “No Country for Old Men,” “Avatar” over “The Hurt Locker”). However, “Social”‘s strong showing proves that it is definitely in it for the longterm win.

Some other things that I liked: “Inception” pulling in such a great reception. After the HFPA’s proverbial snub of “The Dark Knight,” I expecting the Christopher Nolan hate to filter into this film’s chances, as well. I was pleasantly surprised. The film pulled in 4 nominations. Also, it was very nice to see noms for both Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams. I have not yet seen the film so I can’t say that I’m pleased because they impressed me, but just that the Globes had enough hootspa to nominated such a dark and gritty film, especially with all of its MPAA controversey. Plus, Ryan Gosling is one of the most impressive young performers working in the game, today.

All right, let’s move on to the laughable. The Drama section was fine, if not predictable. The Musical/Comedy section is a travesty. I will refrain from completely ripping apart their nominations for “Burlesque” and “The Tourist” for I have not seen them. However, when a film receives a Metacritic score of 48 as in “Burlesque,” or much less a 37 that “The Tourist” received, there is something to say about the finickiness of nominating said films for the distinction of Best Picture of the Year. Even the Globes would stoop that low for a chance to get Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie and Cher all at their swanky party. I think that I’m actually going to see at least one of those films just to relish in my ridicule of them.

Here’s a few more things grinding my gears: Michael Douglas’ last ditch nomination for “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.” I know that the man is inching close to death, but couldn’t they have at least given him a goodbye nom for something like “Solitary Man,” something he might be proud to be remembered for? The snub of Sally Hawkins, to make room for Angelina Jolie, no less, is an insult. I’m sure it was also necessary to make sure Johnny Depp had two nominations instead of recognizing some of the amazing work done by Jim Carrey in “I Love You Phillip Morris?” And the big finale…..not a single nomination for “True Grit.” Tell me that they just didn’t see it and not that they would literally hand a complete snub to it on purpose.

Some day, I hope that the Golden Globes are fully recognized for the sham that they are, or maybe they’ll just shape up. Who knows? Until then, I will try to forget that these ever happened.