Hollywood Buys "Antichrist"
  Country Music: Too Much Freedom-Loving?
  The Obscenity Blackout
News Columns
  Notre Dame Pacifier?
  Weak Knees at the White House
  Bias In Specter-Scope
  Media Reality Check
  Notable Quotables
  Press Releases
  Media Bias Videos
  30-Day Archive
  Gala and DisHonors
  Best of NQ Archive
  The Watchdog
  About the MRC
  MRC in the News
  Support the MRC
  Planned Giving
  What Others Say
MRC Resources
  Site Search
  Media Addresses
  Contact MRC
  MRC Bookstore
  Job Openings
  News Division
  Business & Media Institute
  NewsBusters Blog

Support the MRC

This column was reprinted by permission of L. Brent Bozell and Creators Syndicate. To reprint this or any of his twice weekly syndicated columns, please contact Creators Syndicate at (310) 337-7003 ext. 110





 L. Brent Bozell


Those Parochial Golden Globes

by L. Brent Bozell III
December 20, 2004
Tell a friend about this site

One commonly assumes that movies and television shows that win industry awards are therefore the best movies and television shows, the apex of artistic achievement. With the new year approaching, the awards buzz starts again. The unveiling of this year's Golden Globes nominations underscores that in some instances the "best" are being saluted. In others, Hollywood is celebrating its own sense of enlightened outrageousness.

In one sense, the Golden Globes is a bit of a (bad) joke. How many people know it's a tiny operation run by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, which consists of only 83 voting members, all heavily lobbied by studio brass? It's better to think of the nomination process not as a measurement of art, but as the Hollywood equivalent of a high-school popularity contest. And just like high school, the trendy, naughty stuff that shows a little skin and talks with a little titillation is more likely to prevail in any judgment of "art."

For TV, the drama series picks were Fox's "24," ABC's "Lost," FX's "Nip/Tuck" and HBO's "The Sopranos" and "Deadwood." If this is the very "best" in television, the Golden Globes underscores the miserable condition of the entertainment industry today.

Hollywood judging panels always bow and scrape toward HBO, hailed as the courageous envelope-shredding pioneer of pay-cable, even as "The Sopranos" vanishes and the dark, depressing Western drama "Deadwood" features a "realistic" though perfunctory F-word every thirty seconds. At least those shows have some production values and some vague sense of good and evil. You cannot say that "Nip/Tuck" has either of these. In fact, you can never say too much about how ridiculously offensive it is. Its long-running sub-plot about the female "life coach" sleeping with the 14-year-old boy (and her own teenage son, too) culminates upon the revelation that "she" was really a transsexual. It's this kind of plotting genius that is so appealing to the Golden Globes crowd.

The comedy nominees were Fox's "Arrested Development," ABC's "Desperate Housewives," NBC's "Will & Grace" and HBO's "Sex and the City" and "Entourage." Once again, these nominees all share one thing in common: they are also dark and disturbing, even when the humor is attached.

For example, one plot on "Will & Grace" this fall featured Grace joining Alcoholics Anonymous for the free food, even though she's not an alcoholic. If that's not cynical enough, Grace then jokes that she wants a beer because "Michelle was talking about having a cold frosty one before the state took away her kids." The laugh track ran a large guffaw at this "hilarious" joke about a family being destroyed by alcoholism; it's "thumbs-up" stuff for the Golden Globes.

Then there are the movie categories. One thing you can no longer say about the Golden Globes is that they're not a reliable indicator of who will win the Oscars. In early 2004, the Oscar winners and the Golden Globe winners were exactly the same in the major categories. Charlize Theron and Sean Penn in lead roles, check. Renee Zellweger and Tim Robbins in supporting roles, check. "Lord of the Rings," best picture, director, and even best song and score, check.

It follows, then, that if the Golden Globes ignore a film, so will Oscar.

This may be why Mel Gibson decided to forego wasting his money on trying to get award consideration for his massive hit "The Passion of the Christ." Not only was the Gibson film snubbed from Golden Globe nominations in every category, the exclusion was excluded from multiple news reports. There was no mention of the "Passion" snub in the AP story, or the Hollywood Reporter, or the New York Times, or the Washington Post.

While the Golden Globe movie picks aren't as universally dark as the TV nods, it's not surprising that the libertine left (or is it the libertarian right?) in Hollywood did find characters worth honoring with Golden Globe nominations. Nods of approval went to the sophisticated sexologist "Kinsey" and the abortionist title character of "Vera Drake." These figures make better Hollywood heroes than the suffering but certain Jesus of Gibson's vision, a Jesus so unlike the confused horny-hippie Jesus of Martin Scorsese in "The Last Temptation of Christ."

The Golden Globe may desire the cachet of being a global honor, but nothing is further from the truth. These awards are only parochial, with everyone involved in the festivities reflecting only the twisted values that rule in the 90210 zip code. It's comforting to know that over time, what the rest of America holds dear in their hearts will be remembered, and a lot of today's pointless sleaze, which the Golden Globes is honoring, will be forgotten.


Voice Your Opinion!
 Write to Brent Bozell



Home | News Division | Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts 
Media Reality Check | Notable Quotables | Contact the MRC | Subscribe

Founded in 1987, the MRC is a 501(c) (3) non-profit research and education foundation
 that does not support or oppose any political party or candidate for office.

Privacy Statement

Media Research Center
325 S. Patrick Street
Alexandria, VA 22314