Seven Gripes About the Nominations for 2011 Golden Globe Awards
by Ethan Anderton
December 15, 2011
This morning the nominations for the 69th Annual Golden Globe Awards were revealed, and as we've come to expect from the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, they weren't exactly what we were expecting (if that makes sense), and there's more than a few odd choices honoring some of the talents on the big screen from the year 2011. However, my biggest gripes lie with some of the exclusions from this year's nominations, and the method by which some of the nominated films are categorized, a problem that arises every year, especially within the Best Comedy or Musical category. Read on for my issues with the noms!
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II - This one might actually be a taste of things to come when the Oscar nominations come around early next year, but there's no denying that the Golden Globes deciding against a nomination that would essentially honor the entire multi-billion dollar franchise is a bit of a poor decision. Of course, the film does have to contend with the fact that it's not a stand alone story, and it relies on the rest of the series for much of the drama and gravitas that you feel from the epic conclusions. But that doesn't mean the combination of performances, outstanding special effects and grand scale of adapting J.K. Rowling's novels aren't deserving of at least a nomination, especially when something as melodramatic and pandering as The Help gets a nomination.
The Muppets: After becoming one of the most loved and critically lauded films of the year, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association apparently didn't feel the need to honor the return of Jim Henson's iconic characters to the big screen after a decade of absence, not even with a nod for Best Original Song. Aside from the fact that the film is both a musical and a comedy, thus fitting not one, but both of the parameters for being nominated for the Best Musical or Comedy category, the film evokes a feeling that tops nominees like Bridesmaids no matter how raucously funny the film may be. However, my beef doesn't lie with Bridesmaids at all, but rather the inclusion of another film that certainly deserves to be nominated, but not in this particular category. That brings us to…
My Week with Marilyn: Don't get me wrong. This film is absolutely fantastic and deserves every single nomination thrown its way, but the fact is that this film is neither a comedy or a musical and therefore should not be nomination in this category. Sure there are some laughs to be had throughout the film, but this is a film about a short time in the life of Marilyn Monroe as she struggled with fame, impressing director Laurence Olivier, and breaking the heart of a young man enamored with the glitz and glamour of Hollywood, filmmaking, and of course, Ms. Monroe. Nominate the film, nominate every member of the cast, but do it in the dramatic category where it belongs and let films like The Muppets shine along with the rest of the films made to be comedies.
Crazy Stupid Love: Kudos to Ryan Gosling snagging a nomination for this film (though he deserves even more love for his turn in The Ides of March, for which he was also appropriately nominated), but the fact that the film itself wasn't nominated in the Best Comedy or Musical category is absolutely mind-boggling. This is one of the most finely tuned romantic comedies I've ever seen with stellar performances from each and every cast member and a fantastically written script that hits in all the right spots. It's surprising, touching, hilarious and dramatic and deserves to be recognized as such.
The Beaver: This one may be where most people disagree with me, but The Beaver still stands as my favorite film of 2011. Following the breakdown of Mel Gibson, this film came around and proved that he's still got the talent to deliver an amazing performance. Combine that with a great return to the director's chair for Jodie Foster and one of the best original screenplays I've read in a long time, thanks to Kyle Killen, and you've got a film that will make you laugh, cry and reflect on your own life. Perhaps it was Gibson's public image that made the HFPA ignore this spectacular film, but many will not forget it.
Andy Serkis: Seriously? We're going to nominate Leonardo DiCaprio for J. Edgar, a wholly undeserving film and not even the best performance of his career, and George Clooney for The Descendants, a decent but not mind-blowing performance, but we're just going to ignore the man who brought Caesar to life in Rise of the Planet of the Apes? I'm going to toss this up to the fact that no one is quite sure how to deal with motion capture performances, but knowing how Serkis approaches his craft, talking with the actor about his process and seeing the result of his work on screen is reason enough to absolutely outrage me that he wasn't nominated. Rise of the Planet of the Apes does not work without Andy Serkis. He makes you fall in love with a fictional primate, and one that essentially becomes a villain that destroys the human race. If that's not acting worthy of a nomination, then I don't know what is.
Anyway, when it comes down to it, the Golden Globes are the less important out of the major awards in cinema. There's a lot of schmoozing going on for the Hollywood Foreign Press, and there's plenty of nominations that have been expected well before the announcement was made this morning. I've even heard from some Los Angeles locals that today there were already billboard for War Horse bragging about Golden Globe nominations. Doesn't sound like some of them were a surprise at all, and if anything, that just helps me tone down the anger from these sad exclusions from this year's nominations. Thoughts?
Also, Drive, Super 8 and Source Code should have gotten nominated for best drama. And Elisabeth Olsen for MMMM, but the Globes are a joke anyway.
Andreas Climent on Dec 15, 2011
source code? r u serious? agree the gobles are a joke though.
wolf on Dec 15, 2011
Tree of Life completely ignored? Color me surprised.
Cedric Ceglowski on Dec 15, 2011
overrated movie that made no sense. just beauty shots and brad pitt being awesome. the rest was shite
Alex W on Dec 15, 2011
Allegorical/metaphysical films are not for everyone. But i can assure you the rest was for from fecal matter.
happy camper on Dec 15, 2011
He's right though, it was mostly just a lot of beautiful shots, felt more like some sort of BBC program than a narrative film. The narration got overshadowed by the images, was fighting for attention with it, and gets lost in the struggle. It seemed more of a "read my mind, this is what I'm trying to say" rather than "let me show you what I'm trying to say." After a few watches one can probably catch on, but I wasn't dying to see it again after the first. I'd be surprised if it doesn't get thrown a nom by the Academy for cinematography though.
Mike P. on Dec 16, 2011
Completely agree. I always say it's the most beautiful film i've ever seen, and the most boring film i've ever seen. And i've yet to finish it. Movie puts me to sleep faster than a bottle of lunesta
Danimal on Dec 16, 2011
The problem is that people are being bottle-fed a specific formula by Hollywood. This is why Tree of Life is so refreshing and important for cinema. Malick tackles arguably the most difficult question of all time and offers a sincere interpretation that relates with all of humanity at different levels. I won't be surprised if Tree of Life will be lauded as a masterpiece many many years from now.
Lossy on Dec 16, 2011
This is what happened with Scott Pilgrim last year too. It was a comedy and it had music but it's deserved spot was taken away by the tourist.
Michael Lee on Dec 15, 2011
Alex what is your opinion for no recognition of Take Shelter?
Zade on Dec 15, 2011
sorry i meant Ethan, but it would be nice to hear from alex too
Zade on Dec 15, 2011
im not the alex you are referring to but the fact that Michael Shannon didnt get a nom is redonk
Alex W on Dec 15, 2011
So your still pushing this Andy Serkis Oscar nomination? Did you read up on any of the provided links in the comments section from the last time this was brought up? To give Serksi an Oscar nom ignores how the entire motion capture/post process works and rewards one person who's work is greatly improved upon and made reality by many others.
P_d on Dec 15, 2011
no "warrior" = failed nominations
Anon on Dec 15, 2011
I watched The Beaver last night - do not agree with your assessment. We've all got opinions of course, and whilst the film is good it is not great. Mel is great but it doesn't make up for melodramatic pandering.
Dukephoenix on Dec 15, 2011
My opinion - Bridesmaids was too recognized this year. Shame was under nominated. Ides of March gets thumbs up I'm glad it pulled through. Crazy Stupid love under nominated. Drive WAAAYYY under nominated. Glad that Hugo is receiving the recognition, easily one of the best of the year. And I think the whole noms list is more INTERESTING then PRECISE. It is surprising everyone, but the Oscars are nearly always different from the Globes. I'm excited to see the Globes decisions and the Oscars noms. Gonna be a great season for movies let me tell ya.
Alex W on Dec 15, 2011
I agree with most of what you said Alex about Andy Serkis, with the exception of your statement about Caesar becoming the villain. Maybe from the human perspective to the villain human characters Caesar is vilified, but to the majority of audiences we now want a monkey as a best friend. Give me a monkey you damn dirty ape! (Yes, I know Caesar isn't technically a monkey) "Rise" was good, but mediocre without Serkis.
Quanah on Dec 15, 2011
wow, you are certainly on point. i think what happened to rise of planet of the apes were all the previous HORRENDOUS planet of the apes films. finally a great one comes along that has been written by someone who clearly reads and has read the original story by pierre boulle [something that is CLEARLY missing from all the previous planet of the apes films], this film is allbut ignored BECAUSE of all its horrible predecessors.
marais morris on Jan 24, 2012
these awards are a joke that are a pick by a group of 80 people, and are super politically charged and super biased about selections of winners. I could careless who they nominate.
happy camper on Dec 15, 2011
I agree with you on Harry Potter 7 Part 2 not being nominated. But the golden globes exist to make us laugh more than anything...
Anonymous on Dec 15, 2011
You sir are correct!! my complains are exactly those, plus the lack of Gary Oldman
Héctor Pérez Tovar on Dec 16, 2011
Deathly Hallows part 2 should not be up there, and I'm glad it isn't. The effects were great, yes, but that's about it. It was a bunch of scenes to please the crowd, and overall a dissatisfying, forgettable conclusion. Completely disagree with the comment about Clooney's performance being just decent as well. You're right in that motion capture is something that no one's sure what to do with at the moment, it'll be interesting to see how this is incorporated in the future.
M, on Dec 16, 2011
Drive seems to be under appreciated.
Davide Coppola on Dec 16, 2011
The praise for the Muppets needs to stop. It was a crappy musical that happened to feature Muppets. It was a weak plot driven by cashing the last check available on nostalgia. While the comedy was awesome, the human-driven plot was as tepid as was the crescendo for the fund raiser: Operatic whistling?!?! WTF! The 1 good song: "Man or Muppet" conveyed the entire films problem: was it a man-movie or was it a Muppet-movie? And it was clearly a Man movie, NOT a Muppet Movie. NO "Muppet Movie" has an opening number featuring 1—count it, 1, stupid, unknown—puppet. The show stopper should have been "Rainbow Connection" since this movie didn't have a successfully original bone in its body. Stop it, just stop it. And don't get me started on how god-awful Kermit sounded and why the hell no one could find someone who could imitate Hensons original voice decntly? Just 1 big let down that joins the ranks of Treasure island, Oz and other Muppet-bombs.
Voice of Reason on Dec 16, 2011
the beaver was horrible and therefore you are horrible
Chesty Guesty on Dec 16, 2011
I have a couple complaints about this 1. Harry Potter should be up there just for it being such a generation defining series 2. Warrior is not present at all. It should be in Best Picture and Some Actor nods for Nick Nolte, Tom Hardy, and Joel Edgerton 3. Andy Serkis should be up there for actor just because without is flawless performance of Caesar, the movie wouldn't nearly have been as good as it is. Those are my problems with the list of nominations
Clocker910 on Dec 16, 2011
I could not agree more with you about "The Beaver." Mel Gibson gave a truly protean and hauntingly enigmatic performance that should have garnered him a nomination at least.
Contextmafia on Dec 16, 2011
So tired of the Andy Serkis love. Gollum was every bit as annoying and retarded as Jar Jar.
Geoffrey Shauger on Dec 16, 2011
Why are you so hung up on Andy Serkis getting nominated? Seriously no matter how many journalists try to jump onto that band wagon - the lack of knowledge about motion capture will only make you look like fools for thinking he deserves a nom... if he does it needs to be in a category with the animators!
Dom on Dec 16, 2011
but it's okay to nominate clooney? serkis wasn't nominated because ALL the other previous planet/apes movies SUCKED and had nothing to do with the boulle book or the tenets of science fiction in the first place.
marais morris on Jan 24, 2012
you forget the cars 2.............
Abhinav Saxena on Dec 17, 2011
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.