How is "Modern Family" a Mini-series or Made-for-tv movie? And how did actors from the show get in that category?
One of the many quirky, weird things about the Globes is that they group all of their supporting TV nominees into a single category: comedy, drama series, miniseries, TV movie. It's all in the same bucket.
Every time an award show egregiously snubs Friday Night Lights, a scrappy underdog team misses the last-second hail mary pass. (I mean seriously, Kyle Chandler WON the Emmy this year. You'd think maybe someone in the Hollywood Foreign Press might take note.)
I wasn't sure it counted in the Globes's eligibility period. I would think so, but they also recognize a lot of new shows that are not even done with their first seasons yet, so it's a little strange.
That said, whenever Friday Night Lights is not rewarded or praised, at least one terrorist wins. You speak truth.
Did we ever hear how the paternity claims against Justin Bieber were resolved? He took a paternity test, and reportedly was going to sue the woman who claimed he fathered her child. Any updates?
Last we reported (I think) the suit had been dropped, or more or less dropped.
I don't think Bieber has filed suit yet. And that may have been a scare tactic, too. I suspect the whole thing will go away.
In what universe are assassination target Gabrielle Giffords and her astronaut husband Mark Kelly, who have worked so hard this year on her recovery, NOT fascinating, but the talentless Kardashians are?
I thought that was a strange omission, too.
Although -- and I can't believe I am saying this -- people are freakishly fascinated by the Kardashians. I am not sure Trump needed to be on the list.
Also, and I am sure you can hear this question coming: where is Ryan Gosling??
I can't help it. I cringe every time I see a picture of Tom Cruise trying to be some kind of cool, young action hero in some testosterone flick. It's like he's trying way too hard to be cool (and he's done those roles to death), and something just doesn't fit. Dude. You're not Maverick anymore. Get a grip.
I hear you. I understand that.
That being said, "Mission Impossible" is getting outstanding reviews, which may be less about Cruise and more about what director Brad Bird brings to the table. I was supposed to see it last night and couldn't because of other work commitments. But I am looking forward to it even if, as you say, the action thing is getting a little old.
Sooo many high-caliber actors were in "New Year's Eve", that I wonder if maybe they take the roles like that just for fun? I mean, it's certainly no stress for Halle Berry or Robert De Niro to take an easy, cotton-candy role like that, and it's not like they need the money but it does bring in a paycheck.
Exactly. I mean, do the math. When there are that many actors in a movie, the time you spend shooting scenes is minimal. And you get a decent paycheck.
It's like someone saying, hey, if you handle some boring administrative stuff for me, I'll pay you $15,000. Is it beneath my qualification-level? Sure. But I'll suffer through it for $15K. (For the record, I am sure Berry, De Niro, etc. made more than $15K.)
There was some protest when "the Protester" was chosen Times Man of the Year rather than Ryan Gosling. But face it, isn't the guy getting more publicity for NOT getting these accolades?
He is. And obviously a lot of this is tongue-in-cheek. I mean, I like Gosling a lot but he can't win everything.
It's just to fun to irrationally insist that he should.
And once again, no love for Community. This is proof that whoever decides what is "best" doesn't know what they're talking about. I think the Golden Globes pick nominees to make a more exciting red carpet or just to attract viewers.
Yeah, I am not surprised by that. Parks and Rec wasn't even nominated and that has at least gotten some Emmy noms in the past.
I think the Foreign Press chooses some interesting and very worthy nominees. But I also think they are mindful of attracting high-wattage people because they have a TV show to plan. Hence, the noms for Clooney, Jolie, Pitt, etc.
What a joke. Is this an example of the Globes trying to be "hip"?
No, I think it's an example of them trying to embrace what's new. And not only is that a new show, but it has "new" in the title. I mean, you don't get much newer than that.
My memory isn't all that great anymore so this could have been going on all along and I just missed it, but it seems that several of the pictures that were nominated have not yet been released or are just now coming out. So obviously the performances are still a mystery to the general public. Is this pretty typical that there would be so many nominees (pictures, songs, actors) that are yet to be seen by the general public?
Yes, very typical. Most of the awards season fare is stacked up at the end of the year so it's at the forefront of voters' minds. So while critics and Globe voters have seen a lot of these films, regular people won't see some of them for a while.
"The Artist," for example, doesn't even hope here in D.C. until Christmas weekend.
They nominate people that 1) will show up and 2) kiss the Foreign Press people's butts (think bribes). It is not about who's the best at their work, it's about who is the best brown noser. That's why FNL does not get nominated or many other good shows. They won't play that game.
The HFPA has a reputation for being a little less, uh, rigorous in their nomination rules than the Academy Awards do. That is true.
At the same time, I like the open-mindedness in some of the Globes. Like, musicals and comedies should get more recognition. And, whether it's due to brown-nosing, bribes or whatever, there are some deserving pieces of work that get recognition here that they simply won't at the Oscars.
I am interested in seeing this film in spite of Tom Cruise- mostly because of Jeremy Renner and Simon Pegg.
Also, Josh Holloway. At least, that's part of my motivation.
To what extent do you think that one reason for some of the seemingly odder Golden Globe nominations could be that the Hollywood foreign reporters come from different cultures -- chiefly European and Asian, I assume -- so have slightly different preferences than American audiences?
I think there is definitely some of that. A show like "Parks and Rec," for example, relies on a lot of American culture stuff for its humor.
Doesn't mean other people can't find it funny, it just might mean the HFPA doesn't embrace it.
Or it could mean that no one at Parks and Rec bothered to bribe the voters. Although, honestly, wouldn't you think Tom Haverford would be totally on top of that?
Thoughts on Howard Stern as the new judge on America's Got Talent? I think he'll be fantastic.
I have never gotten into the singing shows. But I must admit this intrigues me.
Hi Jen (and Nosy Parker) -- I'll tell you the universe where Karshdashians get booked over Rep Giffords (and scores of other more deserving people) - it's the universe where Barbara Walters get top billing. She's never (or at least rarely) booked anyone on her tired & asinine show who could possibly eclipse her. On her own Barbara Walters special, she is going to be the "special-ist". . . and she knows she can't compete with the likes of Gabrielle Giffords.
Interesting. Not sure if that's true, but that's an interesting theory.
This has nothing to do with Barbara Walters, but I am warning you all now, in this answer, that an American Horror Story spoiler lies ahead...
SPOILER Alert!!! I was honestly moved by you know who's death last night on AHS and her reunion with Violet. I had tears, I tell you! But then I noticed how great both their hair looked. If you get to have your hair beautifully blown out in perpetuity, then I'm all for the afterworld!
AGAIN, SPOILER --
It was very sad. But I had the same thought: she looks so much hotter as a dead person than she did during labor. Dude, that was grueling. I was sweating by the time it was over. She looked so spent.
... that Steve Carrell didn't get a send-off nomination. His "shutting it down" episodes were actually kind of brilliant.
Yeah, that was another weird case where I thought, is Carell eligble? I assume so, but I don't know. It seems like anything that happens early in the year is of no consequence to the Foreign Press.
Seeing Jessica Lange and Evan Rachel Wood listed together in that category made me suddenly want to see a project where Wood plays a younger Lange. Let's make it happen!
All right, it's on the to-do list.
Shouldn't you "have" talent if you're going to make judgments about the talents of others? If so, where would that put Mr. Stern?
I think for the purposes of a TV show, you just need to have a talent for saying smart alecky, funny things about other people. And Mr. Stern does have that.
Sofia Vergara is very beautiful, but seeing that photo of her in this morning's Celebritology reminded me again of how incredibly sick and tired I am of that hairstyle. Very long, draped forward over both shoulders and down over both breasts, curls flipped outward. Sooooooooooo many female celebs wear that style ... YAWN! Somebody be daring and get a new style!
Your feelings have been duly noted.
I don't want to live in that world. He's awful.
Really? I like Jonah Hill. And I thought he was good at Moneyball.
That being said, Max von Sydow really deserved to be in there for "Extremely Loud." Was surprised that he wasn't.
One of the things that always annoys me about these things is that they always seem to favor movie actors who are slumming it on tv. The idea that they couldn't think of any actor in a supporting role on the whole span of television that deserved a nomination more than Tim Robbins is laughable.
I like Tim Robbins, but I agree. There are a lot of supporting actors working in TV series that could have taken that spot. Some fans of "Fringe" were again outraged that John Noble never gets nominated for anything. That's just one example.
I must be the only person on the planet that can't stand "New Girl" (or whatever it's called). It's not funny and I don't think she can act her way out of a wet paper bag. She's the same in everything she does -- see: 500 days of summer & yes man -- monotone voice, expressionless, boring. Total emperor's new clothes with this show. It sucks.
You are not the only person on the planet because I don't either. And neither does our TV critic Hank Stuever.
I did like Zooey D. in "(500) Days," though. Love that movie.
I see our LiLo did well in court yesterday. Except she did try her hardest to miss the appearance ("lost" passport, missed flight). Which brings to mind LuvLindsey, I still wonder who she really was.
I am surprised LuvLindsey didn't write in today. Maybe she's at the morgue.
What wasn't she nominated for a Best Actress in a Mini-Series for her acting sincere during her wedding extravaganza?
You are so right. Another snub!
I didn't care for it, though I thought the older teen daughter was lovely. Clearly there's something I'm failing to appreciate that everyone else can see--what is it?
What I like about Alexander Payne's films is the attention to small details and the way people talk to each other.
Like, all the cursing the kids do around their dad. It's off putting, but I think people really do talk like that.
His characters are real, but not necessarily super-likable, at least not right away. Like the friend of Shailene Woodley's that's always tagging along. He's a total doofus who seems to be there solely for comic relief, until you realize his backstory. And then it makes total sense. And Payne doesn't wring the tears out of that revelation, it's just understated and truthful.
Anyway, those are some of the things I liked about it.
How do the Globes decide whether a movie is a drama or comedy/musical? I saw "My Week with Marilyn" and that film is neither a comedy nor a musical!
Don't despair, EP JD. LiLo still managed to uphold her "honor" by canceling out on "Ellen" (Paris Jackson filled in for her).
If we can't depend on Lohan to be flaky, what can we depend on, America?
I thought that Ben Folds, Shawn Stockman (and new this season, Sara Bareilles) did a really knowledgeable job on "The Sing Off" (a capella groups competition). They, along with host Drew Lachey, are actual performing musicians themselves, so know what they're talking about.
But I suspect most people watch those shows as a lark and less to feel like the people are being judged credibly. Stern's commentary is more likely to generate buzz than Ben Folds. And I say that as someone who likes Ben Folds.
Did Violet always have the power to push Tate out? And will Ben understand just how big a pickle he's in?
That Tate question is one we should have address in our post. There were just too many outstanding matter to tackle.
Based on what Tate has told Violet before, and what Nora said at the beginning of the episode to Little Man Tate, that does seem to be the way to get the ghosts to disappear. Which seems ridiculously easy and raises the whole question of why the Ghostbusters ever needed to exist, but there you are.
Actually, this has me wondering: if Ben just says "Go away" will he just continue living and treating patients in the Murder House? Because he can pretend his wife and daughter are just living elsewhere.
Have the Nominators-That-Be fallen out of love with this show?
I guess. It's been overtaken by "Boss," apparently.
There are lots of awards being doled out this time of year, but the Golden Globes get people actually excited like the Oscars. I mean, who pays attention to the SAGS or the others? But the foreign press seems like a strange group to hold such mighty power in Hollywood. What gives?
I pay attention to the SAGs and the other. But I'm also a weird awards show freak.
The Globes have grown increasingly prominent over the years. Part of that is due to their television presence: people watch them, they get the stars to show up and they have that deal with NBC.
That doesn't necessarily make their choices more valid than the SAGs or the Spirits. The Globes has better marketing.
And, to an extent, it does provide a sneak preview of the Oscars. Although it wasn't quite on-target last year, when "The Social Network" won best picture.
I wasn't surprised to see it wasn't nominated despite a lot of blogs expressing their shock. This season just wasn't that good. Slow and churning.
It was slow in spots, but I thought it was a pretty decent season.
I was more surprised not to see "Breaking Bad" since Cranston was nominated.
Is already hard at work thinking of pithy comments about George Clooney. And the Bridesmaids 'maids. Christmas came early for him!
No, you know what his Christmas is? Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher. I mean, that's a field day of jokes for a Brit.
I love her as much as the next person, but is there a slot that is automatically designed for her every year? I haven't heard a thing about her new M. Thatcher movie, but there she is, nominated for it. Any advance word and whether it (and she) are any good?
The movie is just so-so, but Streep is pretty great. I mean, she always is.
One could argue she's a bit over-the-top in certain scenes. But I thought it was a strong performance. That said, I think I'd still vote Viola Davis. She was my favorite thing about "The Help."
When will the award shows add a category for all those dramedies/seriocomedy/whatever you want to call them? (I know the answer is probably never) I'd love to see shows like White Collar get some recognition, but it isn't a serious drama and it isn't a true comedy either.
Well, that doesn't stop the Globes from nominating other shows that similarly straddle multiple genres. I'd like to see the Oscars start divvying up by category.
Remember the year that Madonna won a Golden Globe for "Evita"? Then she wasn't even nominated for an Oscar!
Right, the musical/comedy breakdown gave Madonna a path to victory at the Globes.
Oh, it's all so complicated.
Anyway, I have to roll. Thanks for all your questions and comments. Next Thursday is our last chat of 2011. Let's make it count! Talk to you all then, if not on Twitter, in the comments, what have you.