Friday, January 28, 2011

Oscars vs. Golden Globes (Rhoades)

The Oscars versus
The Golden Globes

Yes, Oscar nominations for the 83rd Academy Awards were announced this past week, largely mirroring the Golden Globes (with a few exceptions).
Acknowledging that Oscar wins are rife with political and popularity overtones, I still prefer them to the Golden Globes. For one thing, the Motion Picture Academy has a much larger voting pool, with certain voters relegated to specific categories. More than 6,000 members in all. Several here in Key West.
The Golden Globes are merely the opinion of 93 members of the foreign press. Not to sound xenophobic, but I prefer the broader American view of Hollywood.
I expect the results will be similar, with “Social Network” taking Best Picture, David Fincher winning as Best Director, Colin Firth walking away with Best Actor, and Christian Bale again snagging Best Supporting Actor. The female winners are going to be a bit more up in the air, a toss-up between Annette Bening and Natalie Portman, as well as a coin flip between Melissa Leo and Jacki Weaver (in my estimation).
Unfortunately, the timing of the Golden Globes has stolen much of Oscar’s thunder this year. But the redo allows the Academy to correct a few oversights, acknowledging Jeff Bridges and Javier Bardem this time around. And with the Academy’s 10 nominees for Best Picture, several other worthy films will get a tip of the hat … even if the end results are the same.
Nonetheless, we will want to compare this year’s non-comedian hosting of Anne Hathaway and James Franco to the hurts-so-much-it’s-funny style of Ricky Gervais.
The Oscars is about pomp and circumstance, while the Golden Globes is more an informal party. And whether you’re watching at home, at a private party like Jean Carper’s, or popping champagne corks at the Tropic Cinema, February 27 will be a night to celebrate the magic that is the movies. 

No comments: