Shorter Globes puts focus back on films

The revolution will not be televised ““ and it seems neither will the Golden Globes ceremony this year.

In light of the ongoing Writers Guild of America strike, it was announced Monday that the highly anticipated Golden Globes award dinner and ceremony (as well as the many after-parties) have been canceled and will be replaced with a one-hour televised press conference announcing this year’s winners. What’s an industry to do when they are forced to cancel one of the things (it seems) they make movies for: self-congratulating award shows?

In recent years, Hollywood and the rest of the entertainment industry have gotten a lot of flak for the number of award ceremonies held every year. From the Critics’ Choice Awards to the People’s Choice Awards, from the Emmys to the Oscars, it seems there is an awards show for every season and every whim. Yet these awards ceremonies also seem to get bogged down not by the all-consummating “who wins, who loses” but instead by who wears what, who flirts with whom and who falls flat as host. (Chris Rock, I’m talking to you.)

While I am (semi) proud to admit that I have attended my fair share of Oscar viewing parties with nomination scorecard in hand and am genuinely proud to admit I even attended the Golden Globes after-parties my senior year of high school, maybe Hollywood could learn a thing or two by ditching the pomp and circumstance. Sure, I would love to see what first-time nominee Ellen Page of “Juno” would wear to the event and what outlandish costume John C. Reilly would sport in light of his best actor in a comedy nomination for the “Walk the Line” spoof “Walk Hard.” But these ceremonies could use a bit of a diet and get back to what really counts: the past year’s top achievements in cinema and television.

It’s not about Cameron Diaz fighting with Justin Timberlake at an after-party or Isaiah Washington putting his foot in his mouth once again backstage. It’s about “There Will Be Blood” vs. “No Country for Old Men” and whether “Atonement,” the leading contender with seven nominations, will really take home the most gold even after mixed reactions from some influential critics.

There are other benefits with this press conference scenario if you look close enough. With the ceremony just going an hour rather than the normal three, there is more time to get a head start on reading for the quarter or grab a beer at O’Hara’s if you feel so inclined.

Also, there will be no actors attending the event per the Screen Actors Guild support of the WGA strike, so this is one year where viewers won’t have to be reminded of the disconnect between themselves and the actors paid ridiculous amounts of money to act like the average Joe. I don’t know about anyone else, but sometimes it’s a little hard to relate to Teri Hatcher’s latest plight as her “Desperate Housewives” alter ego Susan Mayer when I see her on the red carpet decked out in Ralph Lauren, a fresh Mystic Tan and some Botox.

If the strike continues into the next month and the Academy Awards show becomes the next victim, it will be a true shame for those winners who slaved through minimum wage jobs, film school and their share of disastrous direct-to-DVD gigs to not be able to give the Oscar acceptance speech they always dreamed of.

But for the future of film, would these actors rather the general public know what film they garnered the little gold man for or what designer they took Oscar home in?

The question really is: Without the flair and flash, will the public still be clamoring for the results? Only time, and ratings, will tell.

If you’re going to go crazy without stars to fawn over and gossip about, e-mail your rant to Stanhope at kstanhope@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *