' Cinema Romantico: Who Was The Golden Globes-iest Golden Globes Nominee?

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Who Was The Golden Globes-iest Golden Globes Nominee?



Nominations for the 243rd Golden Globes, a ceremony dreamt up by Queen Marie Antoinette and held at the Palace of Versailles where she would bestow awards to theatre players with whom she most wanted to eat chocolate and drink champagne, a foundation emblemizing their frivolousness (the Hollywood Foreign Press Association took control of the Golden Globes, of course, during the Paris Peace Treaties of 1947), were announced on Monday. "La La Land" got a bunch and so did "Moonlight", which was expected and could be argued as a harbinger for a forthcoming Academy tussle, with critics lining up behind the latter and Jayden Schmadens lining up behind the former.

But, of course, the Globes are not about that! The Globes are about hobknobbing! Like I say every time this year, if I was a member of the HFPA and I had the opportunity to put Nicole Kidman's name on the ballot as Best Supporting Actress so I could schmooze with her, I'd do it. And if you say you wouldn't, well, good for you and for your vigilance in wanting to keep a glorified cocktail party on the up and up which will no doubt prevent you from suffering vengeance in eternal hellfire.

Yet while some wring their hands over what a glorified cocktail party got "right" and what a glorified cocktail party got "wrong", we here at Cinema Romantico are far more interesed in determining the most Golden Globes-y Golden Globe nomination of this year, the nomination that most blatantly re-exposes the HFPA's desire to rub elbows with the A-listers. It is a pre-awards show award we like to the call The Honorary Meryl Streep HFPA Award, so named for Meryl Streep having been nominated for 87 consecutive Golden Globes because the HFPA always wants her at the party. (Ms. Streep was nominated this year for "Florence Foster Jenkins." By rule, Ms. Streep is no longer eligible for her own award.)

That's why the biggest snub, per HFPA tendencies, did not seem, to these eyes, to be Tom Hanks or Martin Scorsese but Warren Beatty for "Rules Don't Apply." I was flabbergasted the ol' Hollywood coot didn't get a nod. Then again, Annette Bening, Beatty's spouse, was nominated for "20th Century Women" and the HFPA probably figured that by nominating her, he'd still show up and then they could give a nomination to Ryan Reynolds for "Deadpool" too so he and Blake Lively could be at the party. The HFPA's savvy. And while I have no doubt that the HFPA would have done absolutely anything to extend an invite to as dapper a dude as Tom Ford so he can have a spot reserved at the highest ranking Beautiful People table, and while there is some documented evidence of aromatic bribery on Ford's behalf, well I saw the shot of Michael Shannon smoking a cigarette beneath a Budget Motel sign in "Nocturnal Animals." I'm not saying one shot alone should earn anyone a Best Director nod, but the standards of a glorified cocktail party should not have to be higher than anyone else's.

In the end, however, The 2016 Honorary Meryl Streep HFPA Award recipient was pretty cut & dried, going to Jonah Hill for "War Dogs", who was nominated for Best Actor, Comedy. Is he deserving on actorly merit? I have no idea. I have not seen the movie. But I know that per Vulture, Warner Bros. has recently mounted a campaign on Hill's behalf, which included "an intimate party for voters at the Chateau Marmont, hosted by Hill’s pal Leonardo DiCaprio", which sounds like a pretty open and shut case of nomination entrapment if you ask me. And I know that that the HFPA knows that Jonah Hill is the life of the party, not to mention that Jonah Hill is surefire awards presenter gold. And so while I have no insider knowledge telling me that Mr. Hill might have skipped out on the festivities if he wasn't nominated, it's reasonable to unfairly presume that the HFPA wanted to take necessary precautions and just officially invite Hill anyway. What, you think Scorsese was going to dress up like a bear?


2 comments:

Alex Withrow said...

This is so much gold. Couldn't agree more. The Beatty/Reynolds justification was hilariously spot on.

Nick Prigge said...

Thanks, man! In the wake of so much hand-wringing whenever these nominations get announced, I like to try and bring things back down to a more appropriate level.