I didn’t bother watching the Golden Globes on Sunday, generally because I don’t watch the Golden Globes ever. I remember tuning in a few years ago and thinking that it was one of the most boring award shows I’ve watched (then again, I generally only watch the Oscars). That being said, I was actually planning on watching the Golden Globes this year, but then it donned on me:

1. For some insane reason, the Golden Globes were not being shown live on the west coast – why watch when I can just get the results online before the show even starts?
2. 24 started at the same time. And yes, I do have DVR.

So, now that everyone else has written about the Golden Globes, I figured I’d finally get around to commenting on them. After all, I like to be fashionably late. Here are my random thoughts:

•  Slumdog Millionaire won Best Drama. Even though I liked The Curious Case of Benjamin Button more, Slumdog Millionaire is the most ambitious of the nominated pictures and perhaps most deserving. Still, the movie is a bit overrated and in other years would be considered an outside chance at best. If you look at the nominees for Best Picture, it’s a rather sorry bunch: all good, but none amazing.
• Kate Winslet won acting awards for both The Reader and Revolutionary Road. Good for her. She’s a great actress and deserving of recognition. Still, I’d probably say Anne Hathaway had a more breakout role in Rachel Getting Married and Meryl Streep was more commanding in Doubt, but Winslet was probably most overdue.
• Mickey Rourke won for Best Actor in a Drama. Good for him, and what a comeback. I’m still 50/50 between Rourke and Penn, and generally lean toward Penn – but then again, we expect greatness from Penn. I must note that having watched Revolutionary Road, Leonardo DiCaprio has once again turned in an amazing performance.
• Vicky Cristina Barcelona won for Best Comedy/Musical. This once again shows the prestige that Woody Allen still carries among foreign critics and Hollywood in general. I just received the film on DVD and have yet to see it, but I’ve heard very mixed things about it. Then again, Allen should be awarded just for getting Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz to make out. In Bruges is by far the best comedy on the list, though I never expected that one to win.
• Sally Hawkins won for Happy Go-Lucky. I haven’t seen it, so I can’t comment. All that I can say is that there should only be one acting category – not separate ones for drama and comedy. Whereas I understand the reason to split comedies and dramas into two awards, a good performance is a good performance, regardless of the genre. It’s good to see Colin Farrell actually win for something.
• Heath Ledger won for The Dark Knight. Of course. Would the venue had been burned down if he hadn’t won, and would the winner have had the balls to go on stage?
• Wall-E won for Best Animated Picture. Of course.
• Despite my reservations for Slumdog Millionaire, Danny Boyle deservedly won for Best Director. I still don’t understand why Ron Howard was nominated in this category.
• I won’t comment on the TV awards as much, other than that I am currently watching John Adams (HBO) and can understand why it raked in the dough. The series isn’t perfect, but for a TV mini-series it is quite impressive. The actors who won certainly deserved it (though I haven’t seen many of the competing shows).

We’ve known it for years. We even talk about it: The Golden Globes are stupid. They’re like an elementary version of the Oscars, a way for lesser films to earn awards that would never win Oscars. Yes, the Golden Globes are considered a precursor to the Oscars, and often help in predicting what will be nominated in the future.

But I sure as hell hope Oscar voters go a different direction. The Golden Globes all but snubbed The Dark Knight. It’s understandable if it’s left out of the Best Drama race, but doesn’t Christopher Nolan deserve a nod for Best Director? And Best Score? There is no film with a better score this year.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona for Best Comedy? This one definitely shows how the Foreign Press think differently than those in America. I didn’t see it, but I didn’t hear it was all that good. And, frankly, there were much better comedies than such a film. Hell, it doesn’t really matter, though: Mamma Mia! will probably win, even though it doesn’t deserve it.

Another real surprise is Tom Cruise for Tropic Thunder. He was great in it, but Best Supporting Actor? For what is officially billed as an extended, over-the-top cameo? Really?

And where is Milk in the Best Picture category? I just got back from it and thought it deserves a chance. I haven’t seen four of the films on that list, but I have to say it edges out Slumdog Millionaire, and I can’t imagine Frost/Nixon is better (I’ll be seeing that one soon enough).

When I look at the list, I guess it isn’t that bad, but there are just a few really weird choices here. On the flip side, I give them props for giving major kudos to In Bruges, which is certainly one of the best comedies of the year despite the fact that no one saw it.

Do you agree with the nominations? What got screwed? What was a surprise?

Up until now, I’ve stayed quiet on the Golden Globes. Yes, the reason is partially that I’ve been too busy to do a blog post, but after the winners were announced in a press conference earlier in the week, I had to chime in. How in God’s name did Sweeney Todd win Best Musical or Comedy at the Golden Globes?

Sweeney Todd, directed by Tim Burton and starring Johnny Depp, is a f**k up in more ways than one. The production values are pretty good, but the movie is boring and features some of the worst music to ever grace musicals. The songs are literally brain numbing, and when sung by the likes of Helena Bonham Carter (who was somehow nominated for Best Actress for her role) and several other actors who just weren’t made for musicals, the film just sucked. Two of my buddies spent most of the time laughing at how bad it was, and even my brother, who I thought might like the film, didn’t find much to be entertained by. My movie review is less than friendly.

All four of the other movies nominated in the category are so much better. Hairspray isn’t anything spectacular, but Charlie Wilson’s War and Across the Universe are both a step above much of the landscape. Juno is simply terrific, and a legitimate (albeit unlikely) contender for Oscar Gold.

I’ve never been a huge fan of the Golden Globes. I never understood the point of them. They’re like the Oscars, only not as prestigious and not as meaningful, and they often have a few off-the-wall surprises like Sweeney Todd that just plain out suck. It’s hard to take the Golden Globes too seriously, and they’re pretty much like Spring Training to the MLB or Pre-Season for the NFL. In other words, they’re meaningless.

While I’m on my rant about the Golden Globes, I’ve always hated the Best Musical or Comedy category. I do realize that comedies often get screwed when it comes to year-end awards (though since Shakespeare in Love, not nearly so much), but the Best Musical or Comedy category often serves as a means to provide non-deserving films a chance at an award (come on, did anyone really think that Dreamgirls was that good of a movie?). Thinking of Dreamgirls, the category tends to favor dramas that happen to have music in them. As Chicago proved, musicals can compete with dramas in the main event, so why should musical dramas (Walk the Line, Ray, Dreamgirls and so on and so forth) get placed in a separate category, which only serves to neglect the real point of the category: to benefit comedies.

And furthermore, do you realize that the Golden Globes nominated 12 movies for best picture this year? 12 movies! For some reason, they nominated seven movies for Best Drama, and another five for Best Musical or Comedy. That means that twelve different movies get to market that they were nominated for Best Picture at the Golden Globes. What bullsh*t.

At least Atonement and Daniel Day-Lewis won for Best Drama and Best Actor respectively.