GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

For the films of 2014
danfrank
Temp
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:19 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby danfrank » Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:57 pm

Eenusch wrote:Big Eyes is a comedy?

From a very recent interview with Tim Burton:

It’s slightly weird that the Golden Globes classified this as a comedy. It is funny, but it’s also serious, though one would hesitate to call it a full-on drama.

I don’t know if I could ever make a real drama. [Laughs] I find everything funny. Even horror. I grew up on horror movies. I don’t know if I could make a real one because I always find them quite funny. But I always love a mixture of things. I was surprised at seeing this with an audience, how funny some things come across. Because it’s so absurd. The real life story is so absurd — and it’s tragic. I always felt it was a dark rom-com psychological horror movie comedy. Good luck trying to sell this one!

Eenusch
Graduate
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:21 am

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Eenusch » Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:54 am

Big Eyes is a comedy?

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby The Original BJ » Thu Dec 11, 2014 10:10 pm

One interesting factoid: unless I missed something, this is the year with the greatest overlap between Golden Globe and SAG acting nominees since the beginning of the SAG awards. Only one SAG nominee (Naomi Watts) did not receive a corresponding Globe nomination.

Not sure what that means, not what it will fortell for Oscar, but it will be interesting to see if the consensus holds or if a few people have been set up for disappointment.

Greg
Tenured
Posts: 2600
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Greg » Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:21 pm

ksrymy wrote:
Sabin wrote:Well that sucks. We're not going to get to witness any spectacularly awkward Angelina Jolie/Brad Pitt/Jennifer Aniston moments that doubtlessly Tina Fey and Amy Poehler will bring up every two minutes.

Pitt is a producer on "Selma" so it's more than likely Brangelina will make an appearance.


Although IMDB lists Pitt as an executive producer, not a producer. I don't now how the Golden Globes work with this, but he might not be one of the individuals cited with Selma's Best Picture - Drama nomination.

ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby ksrymy » Thu Dec 11, 2014 7:03 pm

Sabin wrote:Well that sucks. We're not going to get to witness any spectacularly awkward Angelina Jolie/Brad Pitt/Jennifer Aniston moments that doubtlessly Tina Fey and Amy Poehler will bring up every two minutes.

Pitt is a producer on "Selma" so it's more than likely Brangelina will make an appearance.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15206
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 11, 2014 4:41 pm

The now totally disreputable Daily News' take on the Golden Globe nominations:

Golden Globes voters snub three very American movies: Angelina Jolie's 'Unbroken,' 'American Sniper' and 'Interstellar'

Hollywood Foreign Press Association stayed away from American-themed movies.

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS /Joe Neumaier

Thursday, December 11, 2014, 3:50 PM

The Hollywood Foreign Press Association lived up to its name by snubbing three very American stories: Angelina Jolie's World War II epic, "American Sniper" and "Interstellar."

Then again, what do you expect from 100 foreign journalists with a penchant for gift bags?

Jolie's "Unbroken" was completely shut out of the Globes nominations. The HFPA membership are usually swayed by star power, but Jolie's film is about an American soldier enduring torture at a Japanese POW camp — an interesting take given this week’s release of a Senate report detailing what America has done to its enemy prisoners.

Director Clint Eastwood’s "American Sniper," about late Navy SEAL Chris Kyle, also didn't click with the HFPA. The film and its star, Bradley Cooper, came up empty-handed.

And the only nomination for "Interstellar," which details an American-led effort to save Earth, was for Hans Zimmer's score — voters said, “Houston, we have a problem” with lead actors Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway, and direct Christopher Nolan.

Other snubs included "The Gambler," “The Fault in Our Stars” and "Wild," directed by Jean-Marc Vallée ("Dallas Buyers Club"). Only star Reese Witherspoon got a nomination.

Of course, all these omissions meant good news for others.

"Birdman" followed its strong Screen Actors Guild showing yesterday with seven nominations, the most of any film — two ahead of other hits "Boyhood" and "Imitation Game."

jneumaier@nydailynews.com

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3375
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby FilmFan720 » Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:06 pm

Can't you also, though, assume that in a larger field, both Being John Malkovich and Talented Mr. Ripley would have gotten into the Best Picture field (Malkovich for sure...since the expansion there has never been a lone nominee).

If this were 1999, and our slate was American Beauty, Cider House Rules, Sixth Sense, Green Mile, The Insider, Being John Malkovich, Magnolia, Topsy-Turvy and The Talented Mr. Ripley, we would be saying that's a pretty damn good slate. So comparing 5-picture years to expanded years can get tricky!
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Mister Tee » Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:57 pm

Sabin wrote:Sorry, let me rephrase that. What I meant to say was by that point in 1999, the Golden Globe nominations were out but the Screen Actor's Guild nominations had not yet been announced. All we had to go on were a series of Golden Globe nominations where The Green Mile, The Sixth Sense, and The Cider House Rules had barely made a blip whereas films that would later do moderate to poorly like The Talented Mr. Ripley, The End of the Affair, Being John Malkovich, and The Hurricane seemed in a good position.

Yes, that's exactly the point in time I was referencing. NBR -- which at that point was on a strong run of always including at least 4 of 5 best picture nominees -- had highlighted Ripley (which I think even won director) and Malkovich, and omitted Green Mile and Cider. When the Globes did the same thing, I thought we were set up for a truly edifying season. SAG and, even worse, the DGA, put a wobble into that, and the Academy nods managed to be even worse than feared.

One reason to believe this year might go well (even allowing for Imitation/Theory, which, I agree with BJ, are going to repeat at AMPAS) is that the overall field is fairly thin, so it's easy for the segment of voters with better taste to unite on the good stuff. It's bountiful years (like 1999) where votes are scattered and disappointing things can sneak in.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 6975
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Sabin » Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:39 pm

Sorry, let me rephrase that. What I meant to say was by that point in 1999, the Golden Globe nominations were out but the Screen Actor's Guild nominations had not yet been announced. All we had to go on were a series of Golden Globe nominations where The Green Mile, The Sixth Sense, and The Cider House Rules had barely made a blip whereas films that would later do moderate to poorly like The Talented Mr. Ripley, The End of the Affair, Being John Malkovich, and The Hurricane seemed in a good position.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12333
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby OscarGuy » Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:33 pm

Sabin: The Screen Actors Guild began handing out awards for the achievements in 1994. Tom Hanks (Forrest Gump), Jodie Foster (Nell), Martin Landau (Ed Wood) and Dianne Wiest (Bullets Over Broadway) were the winners. The Cast category was added the following year.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby The Original BJ » Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:08 pm

Mister Tee, I understand your reticence to celebrate too early over how well so many cool movies did this morning. But remember, some more square fare -- The Imitation, The Theory of Everything especially -- did do well too, and I imagine those films will replicate come Oscar morning. I find it REALLY hard to believe that something like Unbroken will suddenly rise from the ashes to knock off one of the more special efforts, and I'm happy this morning that so many of the movies I like this year managed to do well.

In my personal prediction list, I was wavering between Foxcatcher and Gone Girl in Best Picture (Drama). Looks like voters were too, given that the former nabbed Best Picture with Director/Screenplay, and the latter scored the inverse.

I personally thought Whiplash seemed more like a PGA/Oscar film than a Globe one, but its omissions in Picture/Director/Screenplay solidify my impression that its clearly on the outskirts of this Best Picture race, fighting for a spot, than something assured.

Top Five seems like it would have had to score in the Comedy categories to make any kind of run for Chris Rock's script.

That Director list, especially, is pretty cool -- five pretty singular voices in film, not one of them a non-entity. I think not only is Grand Budapest looking like a solid Best Picture nominee, but the doubters are going to have to accept that Wes Anderson is very much a possibility in the Directing category too. It seems like, as many of us thought, it's just his time now.

Best Actor still remains wildly competitive, and I think we should pay attention to how the as-yet-unreleased efforts do in these upcoming couple weeks to see if anyone seems to be building enough steam to nudge out Carell or Gyllenhaal.

I'd thought this would be Cotillard's turf (European tendencies), but Aniston doesn't shock me either (star-obsessed tendencies). Does anyone know when that Cake movie is opening? All I can find is that there's a one-week qualifying release in LA in December, but no mention of any dates.

I saw Maps to the Stars and Still Alice back to back this weekend, and thought Maps to the Stars was so bad, and the movie so under-the-radar, it couldn't possibly help Moore's Best Actress campaign. But, now with a second Golden Globe nomination, Moore adds "two acclaimed performances in one year" to her list of pluses in the Oscar category.

If any of the acting categories are locked up, it's Supporting Actor. I agree that Supporting Actress could be these five, but that there's more room for one of the outliers to sneak in too.

I wouldn't make too much of Selma's screenplay omission at this point -- it's well-written, but not flashily so. I think it's clearly better than The Imitation Game (and Gone Girl), but it's easy to see why those scripts were cited too.

Yes, Mister Tee, foreign films are eligible in Foreign Language Film ONLY here, not Animated Feature. So I suspect at least one of these nominees, if not two, will be bumped by more obscure entries at the Oscars.

All of the Begin Again songs were omitted, though it's worth remembering that all of the Once songs were omitted here too, and one of those went on to win the Oscar. This group sure does have a fascination with the Hunger Games songs -- they've gone for all three of them, all written by different people too.

Yay for the Birdman score!

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 6975
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Sabin » Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:02 pm

Mister Tee
But, as you say, this is "so far" – I remain gun-shy, after that 1999 experience, where The Talented Mr. Ripley and Being John Malkovich looked great after the Globe nominations, but Oscar morning gave us The Green Mile and The Cider House Rules.

But the Screen Actor's Guild nominations hadn't come out yet back then, correct?

The only hurdle I can see is the Director's Guild of America nominees. Not that I see anything by way of huge surprises but if there's going to be one, it's there. If Wes Anderson isn't nominated and Angelina Jolie, hipster beards will hang at half mast.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 6975
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Sabin » Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:55 am

Musings:

-- Obviously we can't play this game until the Director's Guild of America announces its nominations, but if there were to be five nominees this year in all likelihood they'd be Birdman, Boyhood, The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Imitation Game, and Selma with maybe Foxcatcher, Gone Girl, and The Theory of Everything right behind.

-- Well that sucks. We're not going to get to witness any spectacularly awkward Angelina Jolie/Brad Pitt/Jennifer Aniston moments that doubtlessly Tina Fey and Amy Poehler will bring up every two minutes. Bad day for Angelina Jolie. Not only did Unbroken tank at the one place it was half-expected to do well, but her work in Maleficent couldn't elbow its way into the goddamndest lineup in ages. The only one I got right was Emily Blunt. Is there going to be a winner in that category? But Unbroken isn't quite out yet. There are a host of technical guilds it'll make a solid run through and it's a possible PGA nominee. But for a movie that for most of the year ticked around the top of most lists as a possible win, it now resides somewhere around Mr. Turner-territory at the bottom of the ballot.

-- Best Actor is either most assuredly locked up or a race you can't predict with any kind of certainty. Birdman, Foxcatcher, The Imitation Game, Selma, and The Theory of Everything are about Keaton, Carell, Cumberbatch, Oyelow, and Redmayne. The Selma screeners didn't go out on time, Oyelowo would be nominated if they did, Gyllenhaal likely wouldn't, so is that that? Or is it possible that one of the above four would have faltered? Would we be talking about how Steve Carell is done? What Jake Gyllenhaal has in his favor is a showy performance that if seen is likely to be ranked high on ballots, but couldn't one say that about all five of the contenders above?

-- So, that's pretty much it for Best Supporting Actor, right? We know the nominee and the winner. We can pretty much just call it a day? If not these five, then who?

-- This is the first time that the nominees for Best Dramatic Actress have been the same as the Screen Actor's Guild nominees for Best Actress, which are all presumed to be the nominee for Best Actress.

-- Also, how seriously do I need to take Into the Woods? I was reasonably sure I didn't have to take this Rob Marshall-directed film seriously at all. Now it seems as though Meryl Streep is in line for her not-looking-it-upth nomination for it?
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Mister Tee » Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:35 am

Sonic Youth wrote:It's really odd - refreshing, but odd - to think that the three biggest locks for AMPAS' Best Picture are Birdman, Boyhood and Grand Budapest. It's like an inversion of the norm. Other years, we'd be wondering which of the three would be fighting for that 'fifth slot' (back when there WERE only five slots). But this year, they'll be the main focus. At least, that's how it's looking so far.

The only comparable recent year would be 2007, when I awoke to the headline "No Country, There Will Be Blood lead nominations".

But, as you say, this is "so far" – I remain gun-shy, after that 1999 experience, where The Talented Mr. Ripley and Being John Malkovich looked great after the Globe nominations, but Oscar morning gave us The Green Mile and The Cider House Rules.

Nevertheless…as of this morning, my instincts seem to be borne out way better than last year: Grand Budapest Hotel is performing as I thought/hoped, and the ridiculous "Unbroken stinks but they'll nominate it for everything" bandwagon has met (hopefully not temporary) reality

Selma more or less proves it was just an availability issue with SAG, getting the key nominations a best picture contender should (though the screenplay omission is interesting – esp. given the apparent dispute between DuVernay and Webb).

I'll continue to disbelieve in Foxcatcher despite its victories in the past two days. People are looking at Gyllenhaal as the due-to-be-bumped actor candidate, but I think Carell is more likely to fall – I can't see Foxcatcher getting any on-the-bubble nominations (Ruffalo, in a weak category, is far safer). It's still possible Bradley Cooper, Osca Isaac, or (especially) Timothy Spall will rise up at AMPAS.

Aniston again, but the star-whoring aspect of the Globes may mean that doesn't mean much. I still see that fifth slot in best actress as a wild card, not to feel settled till January 15th. (Which seems WAY early for nominations, but I just looked it up last night, and that's when they're coming)

This could be our Academy line-up in both supporting categories, but it's conceivable one of the hovering supporting actress contenders (Russo, Stewart, Der, Coon) could still get in, at the expense of…dare one suggest Streep isn't rock solid? And I live in hope Oscar voters won't default to Duvall, though, as BJ said yesterday, even coming up with an alternate candidate is a challenge.

If this directing slate is repeated at AMPAS, it'd be cause for at least muted celebration. The only way to improve it would be for Fincher to be replaced by…I don't know; Mike Leigh? Of course, the worry is AMPAS will go for someone worse – Tyldum or Marsh; Chazelle would be viewed as a popular choice, but not by me. (Though the "Whiplash could get all major nods" scenario took something of a hit today)

Is Wes Anderson ready to make the same run in screenplay that Woody Allen did three years ago, or Jonze did last year? From barely-nominated to Oscar winner in one fell swoop?

So, are non-US animated films even eligible here? The way this list goes, you'd expect the frickin' Penguins of Madagascar.

And best song remains the crazy-ass category, with most of the tunes people think likely for Oscar nods omitted, and the winner anyone's guess.

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2504
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINATIONS

Postby Okri » Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:30 am

So, will everyone who hates Scott Rudin vote for Unbroken now?


Return to “87th Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest