The Golden Globes look into the Abyss Between Boycott and Insignificance
No champagne in every corner, no stars or red carpet, no accredited press, and no gala on television. The Golden Globes face their most controversial edition this Sunday under the shadow of the Hollywood boycott due to its numerous scandals and with the risk of becoming inconsequential awards.
The Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA), the controversial organization behind the Golden Globes, will celebrate the 79th edition of these awards on Sunday from 6:00 p.m. from the Beverly Hilton hotel in Los Angeles.
But this will not be one more gala of the Golden Globes.
The HFPA explained Tuesday that “there will be no public” and indicated that the select group of members of the association and guests of its social programs that will be there must show a certificate of complete vaccination with booster doses and a PCR test taken at 48 hours before the act.
“There will be no red carpet. Applications for press accreditations will not be accepted for this event,” added the HFPA about this private event that almost looks like a sneak party.
It was already known that NBC was not going to broadcast these Golden Globes for the first time since 1996, but this week it was revealed that there will be no live broadcast on the internet: the winners will be announced on social networks and in a statement after the event.
All these measures collide with the DNA of the Golden Globes, which, traditionally, were one of the most glamorous, anticipated, and exciting parties in Hollywood.
Every year, the world of cinema came together at the beginning of January to uncork the film awards season with a spectacular event packed with figures from the big screen and with a red carpet in which the glasses of champagne did not stop coming and going.
Unlike the ceremonial and formal Oscars, the Golden Globes bet on a much more casual, playful, and fun tone – that was very juicy for presenters like Ricky Gervais, Amy Poehler, and Tina Fey – and had the incentive to include among their awards to the most prestigious of television.
However, these awards, which sometimes came to compete in impact and echo with the Oscars, now look into the abyss.
A LITTLE SURPRISING CRISIS
You cannot say that the descent into a hell of the Golden Globes was a surprise in Hollywood.
Accusations of corruption and highly debatable behavior by HFPA members had been known for years and were even joked at the galas themselves.
Among other dubious ethical practices, Golden Globes voters took advantage of fabulous travel and luxury gifts from studios, television networks, and streaming platforms.
In this sense, many people connected the controversial nominations for last year’s comedy “Emily in Paris” with a visit that members of the HFPA made to Paris courtesy of the series, and that included stays in a hotel of $ 1,400 a night.
The Los Angeles Times newspaper was the one that revealed the ins and outs of this trip and the one that unveiled another scandal: that among the 87 members of the HFPA, many of them retired, there was no black person.
This and other similar news created an unsustainable spiral and Hollywood studios and the television world said enough.
In any case, it should not be forgotten that the Golden Globes malfunction was also useful for a long time for those seeking nominations: it is easier to convince 87 people to vote for this or that film at the Golden Globes than to do the same with the 10,000 or so members of the Hollywood Academy for the Oscars.
In addition, the HFPA sang the “mea culpa,” invited new members to increase diversity, and established new standards of conduct regarding travel or gifts.
But the film and television industry, with stars such as Scarlett Johansson and Tom Cruise at the helm, has not changed its position of boycott before a reform that was announced in the midst of lawsuits, resignations, and cross accusations between the members of the HFPA.
BUT WHO IS NOMINATED?
The exceptional noise around the HFPA has left this year’s nominations on a secondary plane, which were unveiled in December despite the fact that the usual campaigns for nominations were not carried out from the cinema and television.
“Belfast” and “The Power of the Dog”, with seven nominations each, start as favorites in the cinema sections, while “Succession”, with five nominations, is the main contender in the television categories.
In addition, there will be many Hispanic award options.
In cinema there are “Parallel Mothers” by Pedro Almodóvar (best international film), Javier Bardem (best dramatic actor for “Being the Ricardos” ), Rachel Zegler (best actress in a comedy or musical for “West Side Story” ), Anthony Ramos ( Best Actor in a Musical or Comedy for “In the Heights” ) and Ariana DeBose (Best Supporting Actress in a Musical or Comedy for “West Side Story” ).
Also featured are Alberto Iglesias ( “Parallel Mothers” soundtrack ), Germaine Franco ( “Encanto” soundtrack ), and “Dos oruguitas” (“Encanto” song written by Lin-Manuel Miranda).
Inspired by Colombia, “Encanto” will compete for the award for the best animated film, “King Richard” (directed by Latino Reinaldo Marcus Green) is nominated for best dramatic film, and “Tick, Tick … Boom! (Directed by Lin -Manuel Miranda) is nominated for best comedy or musical title.
Oscar Isaac (best actor in a limited series for “Scenes from a Marriage” ) and MJ Rodríguez (best actress in a drama series for “Pose” ) appear on the small screen.