2015 Golden Globes

[notchinc]

Today announced

[frankie]

Oh well....Jim can't win EVERY award. I'm sure he's not too upset about it.

[rachelshamyfan]

Not even the show was nominated!

[Such a Hag]

The Hollywood Foreign Press can KMA

[phantagrae]

Did they already announce them? I'm watching GMA and they haven't yet announced them (at least not yet on GMA...)

[Such a Hag]

At least we have the SAG Awards!    

[frankie]

I definitely think the HFP prefers the more "highbrow" seeming shows on cable and Netflix, and not an old school sitcom. Not that I agree, of course.

 

As my father would say, "Jim is crying all the way to the bank."

[kerrycec03]

This is a disgrace!!

 

As somebody who sells Network TV this is very bad....Only network comedy was Jane the Virgin (I saw, not my cup of tea...too out there).

 

I may not even watch honestly. 

 

To have Modern Family & Big Bang completely shut out....like for an award show AIRING on Network TV....its a shame..

 

Sometimes it sucks to be in Network TV....

[Chrismo]

Do these awards really matter?

[denajeanx]

Please don't tell me OINTB was nominated for a comedy..............

 

ETA: Nevermind, saw it.

 

Are you kidding me?! If it wasn't for Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, I would not be watching.

Edited December 11, 2014 by denajeanx

[nusspot]

If OITNB and the actress nominated win, I'm gonna lose my...temper. I watch it and I like it but it's not a comedy. On a positive note (for me), I don't have to stay awake from 2am to 5am to watch the ceremony.

[Trinabeana78]

Very strange no network comedies were nominated (other than Jane the Virgin, which is....just okay for me). I mean last year, B99, a network comedy, even won best comedy. I always liked watching the Golden Globes, but not sure I'll be watching this year. Oh well.

[Denyy]

Very disappointing and weird nominations. Not saying that just because of TBBT, I'm a huge movie fan and these noms are just... ugh (and a bit of wtf as well).

Yay for Viola Davis though!

[phantagrae]

What I saw on GMA didn't include the TV comedy nominations, just the movie and TV movie noms, along with TV Drama, I guess (their in some weird non-order, it seemed like), because I think The Good Wife got a nom of some sort (lead actress?)

 

I was glad to hear that Mark Ruffalo got a nom for Normal Heart.

 

One of the commentors on GMA was saying that the GGs are always about the "new", so it's not as surprising that something like TBBT or MF didn't get a nom.  "Been there, done that" kind of attitude, apparently, more than simply what's "best" on TV.

 

I'm not really bitter, but I always wish my favorite people would get nominated.

I was happy to hear that The Grand Budapest Hotel got a nom, as well as Ralph Fiennes for his role in it.  Loved that movie.

Do these awards really matter?

 

Yeah, in some ways.

It lends a little weight to an actors name when you can label them as "Golden Globe winner Jim Parsons" or "Four-time Emmy Winner Jim Parsons", for example.

 

Things like "People's Choice" awards don't really mean anything--they are more popularity contests--but the GGs and Emmys do carry some weight.

[frankie]

Matt Bomer also got nominated for TNH--well-deserved.

 

There's a long history of worthy people/movies being snubbed for awards and WTF people winning (Pia Zadora won a Golden Globe for "Best Newcomer" in 1982 for those oldsters who remember. Who's she? Exactly).

 

But Amy Poehler/Tiny Fey are awesome and I love watching the red carpet arrivals. Plus, the Golden Globes ceremony includes alcohol! Drunk celebs are always fun.

[kerrycec03]

I guess as somebody who works in the industry and is focused on network TV, these nominations stink for us.  Granted it absolutely doesn't effect advertising or dollars but it just stinks because now there are so many options and the field is just too damn broad. 

 

And still irks me that OITNB is in comedy categories.  Doesn't belong, plain & simple

 

I am still hopeful that they will revamp some of the categories into the future because its just not fair and its too broad now.  But again, nobody wants a 8 hour award show either.

 

The TV world we live in I guess.

 

And while I agree, they want to reward fresh blood, its kinda pathetic.  Put it this way, Jane the Virgin is so bad in ratings....We here on this side of the desk give it a MAX of two seasons.  While it is quirky and different, by no means is it in this category.  But its this years Brooklyn 9-9.  That show too is painful in ratings and might go 1 more season if that.  These "new" things are great in the beginning & fizzle out fast (case in point a show like Glee).  Started out of the gates strong and then crashed....

 

I am bitter not just cause of BBT & the snubs (still stunned that Jim didn't get a nom more than even the show) but just as a whole how this industry works. 

Edited December 11, 2014 by kerrycec03

[ATM]

Its funny how if your favorite actors/actress get nominated or win awards , they are great/best actors and when they do not get nominated dumb awards, snubbed,weird process ,not fair process etc etc.

 

Same people and same process must be going on every year. 

 

For me all the award shows (tons of award shows) are all bogus.

[pantherpat]

I wonder if Jim will still attend to support The Normal Hear?

[Chrismo]

Its funny how if your favorite actors/actress get nominated or win awards , they are great/best actors and when they do not get nominated dumb awards, snubbed,weird process ,not fair process etc etc.

 

Same people and same process must be going on every year. 

 

For me all the award shows (tons of award shows) are all bogus.

Agreed. I'm not sure how this affects who just want to watch TBBT. Does this mean now we will see even more of Sheldon/Jim on the show since he didn't get nominated? LOL

[ATM]

Agreed. I'm not sure how this affects who just want to watch TBBT. Does this mean now we will see even more of Sheldon/Jim on the show since he didn't get nominated? LOL

 

I don't know about others , but I never idolize actors. They are just doing their jobs and are in a field which tends to be famous, talked about and involves a lot of money.  But that never means they are great people.

there are so many politics involved , many people who are given opportunities solely based on their looks , people who do many things to their bodies to get roles. all kind of nonsense is involved.

 

They are as selfish as I am . Just see the cast of this show. They won't even go to work unless until they are given 1 Million Dollars per episode. It clearly shows they work for themselves , not for fans. Just like most of the people do(involving me)

[denajeanx]

Agreed. I'm not sure how this affects who just want to watch TBBT. Does this mean now we will see even more of Sheldon/Jim on the show since he didn't get nominated? LOL

 

But if Kaley was nominated, it would be a different story, huh? I seem to recall a discussion around Emmy time when some were very displeased by Kaley's lack of recognition.

 

The awards do carry weight in terms of what jobs/opportunities actors will get in the future. It's comparable to adding something to your resume.

[phantagrae]

I don't know about others , but I never idolize actors. They are just doing their jobs and are in a field which tends to be famous, talked about and involves a lot of money.  But that never means they are great people.

there are so many politics involved , many people who are given opportunities solely based on their looks , people who do many things to their bodies to get roles. all kind of nonsense is involved.

 

They are as selfish as I am . Just see the cast of this show. They won't even go to work unless until they are given 1 Million Dollars per episode. It clearly shows they work for themselves , not for fans. Just like most of the people do(involving me)

 

Do you work for free?

 

No one has ever said that actors are perfect.  But in the industry they're in, big paychecks are more common.  Ain't nobody working for minimum wage if they can get more.  And since contracts for ongoing TV shows lock the actors into a schedule that can preclude them doing much else (and the studio is making way more off their backs than they would ever be payed), I think that those big paychecks are warranted.

And it wasn't that they wouldn't go to work.  It's that WB wouldn't have them at work.  WB is the one who decided to delay the first taping.  The actors weren't striking.  WB was the one making the go/no-go decision.

 

But would you go to work if your pay rate was in doubt?

 

How do you feel about professional athletes?  Talk about obscene contracts.

 

At any rate, the awards shows are not about idolizing actors.  It's about seeing how the industry perceives them.  And some awards shows carry more weight than others, have their own history about the kinds of things they tend to favor, which is what we're discussing here.

 

The Emmys tend to go with the familiar.

The GGs tend to go for whatever is the newest, hot topic.

The SAGs are actors voting on actors.

The Oscars often follow the GG movie choices.

 

And so forth.  And the categories for TV comedy shows have been messed up the last few years because of category shopping.  This isn't fan griping.  People who write about such things in the industry have been commenting on it as well.

The most obvious example is OITNB.  There have been articles that said that when the show couldn't get any traction in the drama categories, where it belongs, because of the stiff competition, it started submitting in the comedy categories, because, you know, they made a joke once.

 

Because the show is well-liked, voters want to reward it, but in the drama categories, there were shows/actors the voters like better.  But in the comedy categories, they stood out more.

 

The main awards don't necessarily mean that one actor is "better" than another, since at that level, they're probably all good in their own ways, but having those awards attached to their names does show that they've been recognized as doing a great job.

 

That's one reason you see those labels in things like movie trailers "Oscar Winner ____" "Oscar Nominee ____" to let you know that the actors involved are known commodities who have been recognized for their good work before.

 

I don't think anyone here is saying that the actors are working for charity, but they're obviously doing something that other people want to enjoy.  And if they're really good at their job, why not reward them?

 

If someone thought you were doing a great job and wanted to give you an award or notice you for it, would you tell them you didn't value their opinion?  And if others felt the award meant you were good at your job, would you scoff at that?

 

Yeah, they're in the entertainment industry, but that doesn't mean they're not good at what they do, or that they shouldn't be noticed for that.

Agreed. I'm not sure how this affects who just want to watch TBBT. Does this mean now we will see even more of Sheldon/Jim on the show since he didn't get nominated? LOL

 

How does that logic work?

What does Jim getting or not getting a GG nomination have to do with how much he is on the show?  He's one of the leads.  He was always going to be a big part of the show.

[ATM]

Do you work for free?

 

No one has ever said that actors are perfect.  But in the industry they're in, big paychecks are more common.  Ain't nobody working for minimum wage if they can get more.  And since contracts for ongoing TV shows lock the actors into a schedule that can preclude them doing much else (and the studio is making way more off their backs than they would ever be payed), I think that those big paychecks are warranted.

And it wasn't that they wouldn't go to work.  It's that WB wouldn't have them at work.  WB is the one who decided to delay the first taping.  The actors weren't striking.  WB was the one making the go/no-go decision.

 

But would you go to work if your pay rate was in doubt?

 

How do you feel about professional athletes?  Talk about obscene contracts.

 

At any rate, the awards shows are not about idolizing actors.  It's about seeing how the industry perceives them.  And some awards shows carry more weight than others, have their own history about the kinds of things they tend to favor, which is what we're discussing here.

 

The Emmys tend to go with the familiar.

The GGs tend to go for whatever is the newest, hot topic.

The SAGs are actors voting on actors.

The Oscars often follow the GG movie choices.

 

And so forth.  And the categories for TV comedy shows have been messed up the last few years because of category shopping.  This isn't fan griping.  People who write about such things in the industry have been commenting on it as well.

The most obvious example is OITNB.  There have been articles that said that when the show couldn't get any traction in the drama categories, where it belongs, because of the stiff competition, it started submitting in the comedy categories, because, you know, they made a joke once.

 

Because the show is well-liked, voters want to reward it, but in the drama categories, there were shows/actors the voters like better.  But in the comedy categories, they stood out more.

 

The main awards don't necessarily mean that one actor is "better" than another, since at that level, they're probably all good in their own ways, but having those awards attached to their names does show that they've been recognized as doing a great job.

 

That's one reason you see those labels in things like movie trailers "Oscar Winner ____" "Oscar Nominee ____" to let you know that the actors involved are known commodities who have been recognized for their good work before.

 

I don't think anyone here is saying that the actors are working for charity, but they're obviously doing something that other people want to enjoy.  And if they're really good at their job, why not reward them?

 

If someone thought you were doing a great job and wanted to give you an award or notice you for it, would you tell them you didn't value their opinion?  And if others felt the award meant you were good at your job, would you scoff at that?

 

Yeah, they're in the entertainment industry, but that doesn't mean they're not good at what they do, or that they shouldn't be noticed for that.

 

It would be better if you first read my post , before posting such big posts quoting it.

 

I never anywhere said that I was working for free. If you read my post ,I clearly mentioned that I am selfish.

 

These awards shows only nominated OITNB. As simple as that. I did not do anything.

And if awards shows are giving awards which are about actors work which you seem to consider highly important , then clearly those award shows know better than you and me and all those authors of the articles you mention.

It can't be that while giving awards they are good , but when they nominate something else they are wrong.

And people write many thing within the industry or not. If you stand by your words , award shows decisions are final. But clearly you don't

 

To put it simply

You praise the awards shows and awards

You (and the people involved in the industry according to you) criticize the awards shows and awards

 

And I never said they shouldn't be noticed,I said I don't care. Again please read my post properly and don't imagine things and write unnecessary posts implying something which I never

Edited December 11, 2014 by ATM

[vonmar]

There are more articles online about the snubs than about the actual nominees.   THFP is known for liking shiny, new things and for wanting to be the first to acknowledge a new product each year, Brooklyn 99 is a good example of that, best comedy and actor last year, nada this year.

 

Being a fan, I feel bad about the across the board snubs for TBBT....but they are in good company,  A lot of big name snubs this year in both TV and film.

 

Jim once said in an interview that he is shocked any time he is nominated for anything and is convinced that each award show red carpet is his last.  I think that anyone who works in that crazy industry probably feels the same.

[phantagrae]

It would be better if you first read my post , before posting such big posts quoting it.

 

I never anywhere said that I was working for free. If you read my post ,I clearly mentioned that I am selfish.

 

These awards shows only nominated OITNB. As simple as that. I did not do anything.

And if awards shows are giving awards which are about actors work which you seem to consider highly important , then clearly those award shows know better than you and me and all those authors of the articles you mention.

It can't be that while giving awards they are good , but when they nominate something else they are wrong.

And people write many thing within the industry or not. If you stand by your words , award shows decisions are final. But clearly you don't

 

And I never said they shouldn't be noticed,I said I don't care. Again please read my post properly and don't imagine things and write unnecessary posts implying something which I never

 

I did read your post.  You said that they wouldn't work unless they got those big paychecks.  I pointed out that it was WB who kept them from starting production, not the actors striking until they got their big paychecks.  There's a difference in the implication you make.

"Working for the fans" doesn't mean they don't deserve a big paycheck.  People act as if actors should be working for free and that getting a paycheck makes them selfish.

I know you don't work for free, but getting a paycheck doesn't make one selfish.  You call yourself selfish and I can't dispute that because I don't know you.

So why would you call them selfish unless you're trying to imply something about the size of their paycheck?  What I'm saying is that getting a paycheck doesn't automatically make one selfish and getting a big paycheck in an industry that deals with a lot of money also doesn't make one selfish.

 

We all look out for our best interests when it comes to negotiating our salaries.  That doesn't make us selfish.  Selfish is a loaded word.  You can call yourself selfish, but you can't call someone you don't know selfish just because they make more money than you do.

 

And what I'm saying is that the awards do matter in terms of industry cred, but that in many cases the award nominations/wins can be affected by the tendencies of those voting bodies.

 

Just because you don't "idolize actors" doesn't mean that them getting recognized for their work is meaningless or that wanting to see actors or projects you like being acknowledged is silly.

Just because you don't care doesn't make caring about it foolish or whatever it is you seem to be implying.

And if you don't care about the process, then why are you commenting on it--to show how above it all you are?  To imply that it's a waste of time or energy or something.  If you don't care, why point out that you don't care?  Why not simply ignore a thread about something about which you claim not to care.

 

I never said that the award show processes are perfect.  All we were talking about is how and why some things get attention and whether or not the process is fair.

In some respects it's tainted, but I think that for the most part all those who vote on these things are trying to vote for shows and actors they think have done worthy work.

But in regard to OITNB, the category-hopping taints the process.

It's like a basketball team that's unable to compete in its division going to play in another division where there are fewer competitors or weaker competitors.  Not a perfect analogy, but close enough.  If you can't compete against the others in your category, simply submit yourself in a category where it's easier to stand out.

 

We were talking about how OITNB has been rewarded for category hopping, even though many in the industry think it's unfair.  That's an objective issue, not a "my favorite actor/actress didn't get nominated!" whine.

 

Even without the skewed process, perhaps Jim or the others or TBBT would not get nominated.  That be disappointing for the fans--you know, those of us ignorant enough to care--but at least it would be more fair in the process.

 

All award shows are essentially judging apples and oranges since they're not doing a direct comparison of say 3 actors performing the same role to see whose version was better.  But it's still about saying that this man or woman has been doing good work, or this show is really enjoyable, etc.

And no, it doesn't mean that the award show is right when it acknowledges your favorite and wrong when it doesn't.  But again, we were talking about what it is that a show like the GGs values.