Well, we all knew it was going to happen -- we were just waiting for the proverbial foot covering to plummet: the Golden Globes award ceremony has been canceled. No red carpet interviews, no pithy conversations between television and movie stars, no close-ups of actors or actresses laughing at jokes that really aren't that funny but seem totally hilarious after a few appletinis.
The Hollywood Foreign Press Association, along with NBC decided to scrap the ceremony after a boycott threat from representatives of the Screen Actors Guild. Rather than have an empty auditorium, all parties agreed to adopt another approach to the ceremony -- a extremely less glamorous one hour news conference where the award recipients will be named (to be aired at the same time the original show was to be broadcast).
People close to the awards show say the HFPA will forgo the typical network payment for the news conference (somewhere around $5 million). NBC will have exclusive electronic rights for the press conference and will be able to sell advertising for it. Seems like a win for NBC, in my opinion.
Six Mad Men characters who are in limbo after the finale
Fact or Fiction: Big Bang, Brothers & Sisters and CSI
The TV Squad Podcast: Linda Purl talks about The Office, we talk spoilers, and more
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-08-2008 @ 1:39AM
Ryan said...
This is a win for nobody. This needs to end now.
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 3:26AM
eugene said...
I consider it a win for people who are more interested in the actual shows and industry rather than in sycophantic worshiping at the feet of the cult of celebrity.
1-08-2008 @ 9:31AM
Ryan said...
I resent the assumption that caring for these awards automatically brands a person guilty of "sycophantic worshiping at the feet of the cult of celebrity."
I am a BIG TV and movie fan and to assume that someone like me who actually enjoys the Golden Globes do not care about the "actual shows and the industry" is seriously presumptuous. I like seeing the performances that I enjoyed throughout the year honored. First time nominees such as Lee Pace, Anna Friel, Nikki Blonsky, Ellen Page, Saoirse Ronan, Casey Affleck, Ryan Gosling, and James McAvoy, etc. enthralled me so to see them getting their dues would have been nice.
And these award shows, at least the Golden Globes and the Academy Awards as well as the Emmys, are a big platform for the "industry" and the "actual shows" to promote their product. Sure Grey's Anatomy doesn't need any more promotion, but shows like Mad Men, Pushing Daisies, and other first timers could've really used the push.
Plus this show only takes up 3 hours a year and yet it DOES pump up the "industry" all around.
1-08-2008 @ 2:40PM
eugene said...
If that were true, we wouldn't have two hours of shows like "extra" or whatever doing specials on what celebrities are wearing, who they're going with, what jewelry they and their dogs are going to wear. We wouldn't have fashion designers critiquing the fashions of stars. Then we wouldn't have post award show shows taking us to "exclusive after parties" and backstage exclusives and all this other crap that has nothing to do with the industry or giving small shows exposure and everything with being a bunch of sycophants.
If what you say were true, then simply reading the winners would be enough, wouldn't it?
1-08-2008 @ 3:21PM
Ryan said...
Well reading the names of the winners is all well and good, but you do also get the concept of entertainment, yes? Sure the red carpet coverage is a bit much, but if these award shows don't do all of these "entertaining" bits along with their official business then it would NOT be getting the ratings or the buzz it needs to promote the industry and the shows.
It's like, yes, you can tell young people to vote, but if you don't energize them in some way, what do they care? In this way these award shows and the "extras" related to them (the comedy skits, the red carpet, the interviews, etc.) are just a way to bring eyes to their product (shows, actors, industry).
1-08-2008 @ 3:57PM
eugene said...
Then fine, just admit these awards shows are all about entertainment and not about furthering the industry. It's about ratings and having something to show before the season starts up in earnest.
You wanna say that people debating whether or not katherine heigel gained some weight or if such and such actress is wearing more in diamonds in her body weight somehow promotes shows? You're just kidding yourself. Every year these shows become more and more opulent so why is it every year TV viewership goes down? Why is it that season after season, small, well crafted shows go under with little fanfare yet giant shows like grey's and desperate housewives gets push after push?
1-08-2008 @ 2:11AM
rosay said...
Is the Acacdemy Awards also in danger?
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 2:54AM
Paul said...
I hope this ends before the Oscars are cancelled, seeing as how I have a trip planned (and paid for) to L.A. specifically to cover them!
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 3:33AM
D Colin said...
Here's the thing. The Golden Globes doesn't have a host, so no big opening. They have the actors who present banter some, that's it. Oh they show clips (which we know the WGA have told the Oscars no clips).
My problem is why Letterman gets a deal and a one night show like the Golden Globes doesn't. Shows like the Globes, Oscars help people find out about movies they may never have heard about. Shows like the Globes let people have fun fantasy of "oh that's a pretty dress".
I want my Golden Globes, I want my Oscars. I know I'm selfish. But the producers need to come to the table. The WGA need to stop making "cute" videos. The stars need to stop acting like they don't make $200,000 an episode (or more) and millions for movies and act like they are just as in it as a lot of the WGA.
I can handle watching less TV -it's actually ok. But come on the Globes and Oscars are event nights -- they're fun for us little people of the world. And if you are letting Letterman and United Artists come to a interim deal then why not the Award shows.
Oh and this better get resolved cause I really worry about the soaps. They are really the oldest part of television. Ratings have suffered in years past and it's a industry that needs to be cherished -- no matter what you think of soaps they are a big part of the history of TV.
okay I hope this all gets resolved fair, cause I do feel bad for those out of work
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 10:06AM
Bash said...
We currently have a rail strike here in germany affecting millions of commuters. Quit your whining. It's just an award show and the writers are striking for their food on the table in the coming years - TV will be all-digital in 10 years. It might be a problem for you that there are actually guilds out there who think ahead compared those at GM and Chrysler who got bent over. This will happen NOW and ONCE and then the table is set for the rest of the digital tv age. Deal with it.
1-08-2008 @ 10:40AM
Nicolas Graf said...
Maybe Letterman and UA got deals because they actually agreed to the WGA's demands...?
1-08-2008 @ 3:34AM
Man said...
This strike gets better every day.
I hate award shows and this is what I always wanted just a simple list of the winners. No teaming Martha Stewart and Busta Rhymes for some awkward banter.
Compiled with the introduction of digital TV this is great for true TV fans.
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 8:22AM
segsig said...
The only reason a lack of award shows sucks is because it's a lost opportunity for Clothesoffourbacks to raise money for charities. Otherwise good riddance and finally something about this strike that hasn't been an advantage for nbc.
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 8:40AM
grumpyoldman said...
Good bye to one of the hundreds of a** kissing, ego stoking wastes of time that infest our culture. Let's hope all the award shows go down the drain.
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 8:54AM
horsenbuggy said...
I don't understand the inconsistency here. The Critics Choice Awards were aired last night. You'd think that this isn't normally a big show, but almost all of the nominees were there. They even had George Clooney present a special award to Don Cheadle. In true Clooney fashion, he began his speech with a few sentences about how devastating this strike was to the whole economy of LA and called for them to settle it already. (I sincerely hope that he got Cheadle's approval to do that.)
The only big nominees to be missing were the writers. I don't get it. It doesn't seem to me like accepting an award is working. It seems like it is acknowledging the important role they play in the process. But I don't belong to any guild and don't understand the politics behind it.
I don't know if D.L. Hughley (the host) had anyone write his material or if he just free-styled the whole night. Either way, his poor performance was the best proof that we need writers! His jokes were not only unfunny, they were crude and mean-spirited. He just didn't have the charm or grace to pull off the jokes that were intended to poke fun but not tick off.
For example, it was a really big deal that Brad and Angelina were there - a lot of people made comments about her specifically. I think the uber-couple came to support Cheadle, though Angelina was nominated for her acting in the Marianne Pearl movie and Beowulf was nominated in the Animated category. One of Hughley 's jokes was something like: "Beowulf, the book nobody read became the movie nobody saw." It doesn't look that bad when I type it, but his delivery was so bad. I just thought his jokes were really disrespectful during this tense time.
I guess as I look back, there weren't a ton of big stars there. But this awards season, it seems like the "big names" are not the ones being nominated. As a result. the lesser-knowns, who are being nominated, are so grateful that they are showing up.
Anyway, I don't understand why that awards show was televised, but the GG won't be. Could it be because the Critics Choice Awards were on VH-1? Is it really that big of a deal that NBC is involved?
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 10:35AM
Will said...
Well that sucks. Awards shows are fun. Since I have Tivo now I can skip through all the nonsense.
Reply
1-08-2008 @ 12:09PM
Tristan said...
IF NBC is still getting to benefit then there is really no loser except the writers in this situation?
Reply