2004 Golden Globes (1 Viewer)

[Tony Whalen]

Great show! Loved the ROTK love.

Although I must admit I kept waiting for Nicole to pop out of her dress.

 

[Craig S]

Here's what Dave Poland had to say about the aftermath of the GGs:

The Golden Globes brought few surprises on Sunday night… except how pretty much everyone seemed to be in a good mood afterwards. The winners, the losers, the security guards, the bartenders. Perhaps it was the utter lack of anyone who walked away going, “But I thought…”

Even the big winner, the Lord of the Rings crew, didn’t have that edge that the winners sometimes have. Perhaps it was the three years that they’ve all been working on these movies. But there was a certain feeling of grace that fell over their party. Perhaps it is the trickle down from Mr. Jackson, Ms. Walsh and Ms. Boyens, who are just plain lovely people, not to mention a New Line team that is enjoying major post-coital glow.

Perhaps we're reading too much into a few brief post-announcement TV shots.

 

[Kevin Grey]

As others have mentioned, I do sense there is a bit of resentment against LOTR because it was predominantly made outside of the studio system. That being said, I'm not sure that the opinions of the major Hollywood players are that important- the Academy has a pretty diverse set of members, many who aren't currently in major postions of power in Hollywood. Remember, a lot of those who resent Rings' success have their own movies in the fight this year that will likely split the vote.

Plus, I remember some of the same resentment with Titanic. Not made outside of the system, but James Cameron wasn't particularly well liked by a lot a of people and his pedigree of sci-fi/action films didn't work in his favor.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Ditto to what Edwin has said.






Crawdaddy

 

[Lew Crippen]

Let's just say I was counting "deserved" wins

I thought that both Tim Robbins and Sean Penn were outstanding and deserving. Of course you may feel that there was a better performance, but for me, it would be pretty hard to think that either actor was not deserving.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

I had no idea Karl Malden was still alive! Was it really half a century ago, he was in On the Waterfront?

Is he still taking money out of wallets?

 

[Sean Cauley]

I think it's more to do with the auditing of the vote-counting process than the number of votes, sort of a "look, these CPAs have the envelopes under guard, so they can't be tampered with!" It's pretty silly, though.

I, too, caught Sarandon's comment about special effects and felt it was a barb directed at LOTR (even though Cold Mountain and Master & Commander weren't exactly effects-free films, either); I read something recently where Eastwood made a snide comment about his film being better because it didn't rely on effects. I also read an interview with Clint in yesterday's USA Weekend newspaper insert in which he admitted to not seeing many movies this year, except for Finding Nemo and other kiddie fare he's watched with his daughter, so I have doubts he's even seen a Rings movie.

I think there is a perception among many of the "serious artists" (your Robbinses, Penns, Sarandons, etc.) that the Lord of the Rings films, due to their use of special-effects techniques, are of they type where effects overwhelm performance (like in the Star Wars prequels), or the set-piece action bits are all the film has to offer (like an Armageddon-type "event" picture). They come off like they're not willing to watch the movies to find out why so many people like them, and assume that there can't be any human drama on a scale so big, not on the level they get when it's two people in a room talking. It seems really elitist.

(Disclaimer: Of course, I may be wrong and they may have seen and disliked Jackson's films, or I may have generalized which performers I was talking about.)

I did like Peter Jackson's humility in acknowledging that he's flattered to be in the company of directors like Eastwood, Coppola, Weir and Minghella. It seemed sincere, coming from a guy who got his start in blood-and-guts films.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Eastwood didn't make that specific comment. His studio is pushing MR as the NON-effects movie, and he's simply stating that effects aren't all that matters. It *IS* a generic jab by the awards marketers (who know they HAVE to demean or pigeonhole ROTK...it can't be beaten any other way), and meant to show the voters that only non-effects films are "real" or "worthy" films. Will it work? It might. It'll alienate yet another HUGE section of possible Oscar watchers ("They gave it to a talky drama over LOTR"), but the Oscars are very much about maintaining Hollywood's "importance". Sure, Susan (who I very much dislike...but she still looks great!) took her jab, but it wasn't even legitimate, so who cares? I am jyust happy it won the GG's. Whether or not the Oscar voters deign to reward the director and series is their choice, but the film will live far longer than the other nominees of the past three years (and more), for precisely the reason movies are magic. Heart.

Cate looked GREAT! I didn't realize she was pregnant again, but she looked incredible.

Congrats to all the winners,
Chuck

 

[Citizen87645]

Anyone else think Monster director Patty Jenkins resembled Lauren Graham?

I'm very pleased with the results: Theron, RotK, LiT the major ones I was pulling for.

 

[Sean Laughter]

I thought that both Tim Robbins and Sean Penn were outstanding and deserving. Of course you may feel that there was a better performance, but for me, it would be pretty hard to think that either actor was not deserving.

I originally counted only one award instead of two, meaning that I felt one was deserving - that being Sean Penn. In fact, his performance was the only thing I liked from that putrid movie. Far be it for me to ever agree with anything from Aint-it-cool-news, but I agree with Moriarty's assessment of Robbins' performance in Mystic River.

Overall, I felt the film was an over the top, pretentious exercise in filming a script with as much self-importance as can be mustered by the filmmakers. Aside from Penn's somewhat histrionic scene involving the discovery of the death I really enjoyed his performance, which isn't an easy thing to do when I so passionately can't stand the character he's playing.

As for Susan Sarandon, I want to know what crawled up her butt. I mean, did she not star in one of these effect films? Granted it was a mini-series on Sci-Fi, but still.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

How Joan Rivers ever got any work is beyond me. I'm tuning to E!, and I still have no clue why she's making money.

Anywho, I'll be checking my local theaters for Mystic River. Seems like I missed out.

 

[Malcolm R]

Not really.

I'd have to agree with most of what Sean said, except that I didn't find Penn's performance worthy of any sort of recognition either. I didn't find his portrayal of grief and loss convincing at all. Very forced.

 

[ZacharyTait]

How Joan Rivers ever got any work is beyond me. I'm tuning to E!, and I still have no clue why she's making money.

I wonder the same thing. I really love how she used the opening of her arrival special to talk about Michael Jackson and someone else, saying she believes they didn't do what people alleged they did. I don't remember who the second person she was talking about. I tuned her out. I wish I never would have even turned on E! That channel, IMHO, has devolved into as much ass kissing as possible.

Did Johnny Depp wear his outfit to another awards show or to a premeire? When I saw him arriving, I knew I had seen him wearing that outfit somewhere else. Too bad he didn't show up dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow. That would have been awesome.

 

[JasonB]

Jeff:

Thanks for posting that story about Miramax and LOTR. I had no idea that happened. I shudder in horror thinking about what LOTR could have been compared to what it has become. Bless the wise souls at NewLine!!

 

[Craig S]

I believe Penn deserves the Oscar this year - but not for Mystic River. I found his work in 21 Grams much more subtle & effective.

Eastwood didn't make that specific comment. His studio is pushing MR as the NON-effects movie, and he's simply stating that effects aren't all that matters. It *IS* a generic jab by the awards marketers (who know they HAVE to demean or pigeonhole ROTK...it can't be beaten any other way), and meant to show the voters that only non-effects films are "real" or "worthy" films. Will it work? It might.

Well said, Chuck. Late last year I saw Eastwood on Charlie Rose, and if my memory is correct that's the interview the "special effects" quote was drawn from. In context it was not the jab at LotR that Warner's awards marketers are slanting it as.

As to if it will work - well, if that is indeed their strategy I hope it backfires on them. It's very mean-spirited, and I think it looks bad for an actor like Sarandon to get up and make that kind of comment which essentially demeans all of the fine actors who did such wonderful work in the LotR films.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Will it work? It might.

Did it work when it came to getting the Hours a win over Chicago. NFWay.


And I think many of you guys are crazy in your "Hollywood hates LOTR" stuff. It's not like PJ found the only few older actors that were LOTR nuts in Lee and McKellen and Holm.


People are reading too much into direct and indirect comments coming out. Unless I hear Tim Robbins say "LOTR was crap and it's totally unworthy" then I won't think he has any feelings other than pride in his own work which is likely what he is most focused on at this point, same with his wife.


No different than Murray's funny jab at how dramatic roles get more respect than comedic ones, something that just about every actor seems to agree with but no one is willing to put their Oscar vote behind.


Sean Penn was so awesome in Mystic River, and Robbins wasn't far off his pace, that their wins were no brainers to me. Penn and Depp are both 2 of Hollywood's best talents and are still waiting that really big recognition.

If you haven't done so go rent Before Night Falls and see brilliant cameos by both of them.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I'd have to agree with most of what Sean said, except that I didn't find Penn's performance worthy of any sort of recognition either. I didn't find his portrayal of grief and loss convincing at all. Very forced.

Well, it doesn't make me an expert but for what its worth I just went through those emotions less than a month ago with my dad's death (and a 16 year old friends death before me about 10 years ago too) and between Mystic River and Big Fish, Penn and MR were light years ahead of Fish in capturing my emotions and presenting a character I could identify with in terms of sorrow, bitterness, anger, etc. Despite the fact that Fish is much more in line with what I went through with my dad.

I fully believed Sean Penn and I was pretty pleased with Robbins as well. When they were on screen at the same time I thought it was electric.

I was also really happy with Fishburn and Bacon too, esp. Fish who at times backed off or twisted on things just enough to really give it a good edge.


Chuck - I haven't seen 21 Grams to agree or disagree with you. I think that might involve an out of town trip to Cincy to catch it, or wait till DVD (argh).

 

[Matt Stone]

If you don't want to go all the way to Cincy, it's playing here. I really liked it, and thought Penn was great...but prefer his MR performance. Hell, I thought Robbins was even better than Penn in MR...so I was extremely happy with both wins.

 

[Craig S]

Post moved to Oscar thread by author.

 

[JJKP]

_