Golden Globes Not so Golden
Okay, film fans, I have to admit I took in the Golden Globes ceremony last night--a first for me. The event confirmed the silliness and narcissism of Hollywood, though there were a few surprisingly touching moments (Jeff Bridges accepting for Best Actor--I've long been a big Bridges fan, and he showed uncommon grace in acknowledging others).
But what about the award winners? "Avatar" stole the show, receiving awards for Best Director and Best Dramatic Film.
Now I'm getting upset.
Look, as I wrote in an earlier post, Cameron's latest film is spectacular, and John Rimel makes a convincing case that "Avatar" may be for contemporary film what "Fantasia" was for 30s film. And I could even make a case that Cameron's portrayal of hybrid creations--human + avatar--neatly describes a real fear and hope for humanity going forward as technology makes ever more outlandish variations on "the self" possible.
But please, "Avatar" over "Up in the Air"? I haven't seen the Jeff Bridges film, "Crazy Heart," or the Iraq War film, "The Hurt Locker," but both seem like engaging, sophisticated art.
Does money really rule the roost at these awards ceremonies? In other words, did "Avatar" get the nod because it's making billions and billions of dollars? If so, that's a sad commentary on the state of our collective judgment.
But what about the award winners? "Avatar" stole the show, receiving awards for Best Director and Best Dramatic Film.
Now I'm getting upset.
Look, as I wrote in an earlier post, Cameron's latest film is spectacular, and John Rimel makes a convincing case that "Avatar" may be for contemporary film what "Fantasia" was for 30s film. And I could even make a case that Cameron's portrayal of hybrid creations--human + avatar--neatly describes a real fear and hope for humanity going forward as technology makes ever more outlandish variations on "the self" possible.
But please, "Avatar" over "Up in the Air"? I haven't seen the Jeff Bridges film, "Crazy Heart," or the Iraq War film, "The Hurt Locker," but both seem like engaging, sophisticated art.
Does money really rule the roost at these awards ceremonies? In other words, did "Avatar" get the nod because it's making billions and billions of dollars? If so, that's a sad commentary on the state of our collective judgment.
Views: 4
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Heckel on -
Hey Ken,
Don't be offended, but maybe you are being just a little naive about the correlation between the big awards shows like the Golden Globes and the Academy Awards and film as art (or even good films). These awards certainly aren't based on critical judgment, not when millions (even billions) of dollars rest on the outcome. I have never felt that these awards can be taken seriously. That view has saved me a lot of heartburn over the years. -
-
Permalink Reply by Ken Egan on -
No offense taken--I think you're right! Growing up is hard to do. . . .
-
-
Permalink Reply by Ken Egan on
-
But Jim, let me ask a serious follow-up question, in light of the forum on "The Arts and Civic Engagement" just posted to this website (under "New and Noteworthy"): Is it possible for a Hollywood-produced film to combine artistic and commercial motives? I sense from your previous posts to the Film Club that you're skeptical of any artistic merit to Hollywood films. Yet I'll be naive enough to admit that films such as "Cool Hand Luke," "Bonnie and Clyde," "The English Patient,' "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," and many others have made a difference of my understanding of the world.
Can Art and Mammon coexist in contemporary movies? -
-
Permalink Reply by Clair Leonard on -
I can't answer any of your concerns as I am still working on a sitter to get to Avatar and The Road which comes January 22. I did watch the Golden Globes, which is entertaining. I also enjoyed Jeff Bridge's acceptance speech. It was great. Scorsesee was interesting this time too, I enjoyed his comments about preserving film. 500 Days of June was nominated for a lot of awards, but didn't get many. We watched it last night and it was a bit of a chick flick, but there were a couple of funny moments and I liked some of the tricks they used. I can see why it got the nominations but not the prizes. The actors were well chosen, fun to watch, pretty faces. I imagine Hurt Locker will be good, but sometimes the subject matter is a little too real for me. Have any of you seen It's Complicated. If I had the time and the money, I'd just take a week off and go to the lot of them and get it over and done with so I could respond with some knowledge of the subject. I like the Golden Globes, mind you Ricky Gervais was a little edgy. I thought some of the jokes were borderline poor taste. Perhaps, I'm taking offense to the drunken Irish comment and the oh I guess everyone else is getting pissed tonight including me except a certain famous actor who stared in Braveheart, you know the one I'm talking about, who's name slips my mind now...
-
-
Permalink Reply by Ken Egan on
-
Mel Gibson--he and Gervais seemed to have a good laugh.
I saw "It's Complicated" last night--talk about a complicated response. . . .
Loved Meryl Streep--she can do pretty much what she wants creating a character. Alec Baldwin is brilliant as the aging Lothario. But really, the whole scenario left me a bit puzzled and sad. I guess the ethical dilemmas are so multiple, overlapping, and almost self-contradictory that I can't quite decide what to make of the story.
Maybe another way to say that (without giving away plot details) is that I sense the writer and director had contradictory impulses or intentions and hadn't sorted those out in the course of production. Vague--but the best I can offer.
A harsher charge--some of the key turns in the story seemed pretty contrived, not helpful for inducing that suspension of disbelief we long for in our films. . . . -
HM Links
Guidelines for...
Have feedback about this site? Share it here.
Latest Activity
Jan Umphrey posted a blog postCall for manuscripts about your work in humanities-based classes
I'm the editor of a magazine, Principal Leadership, which is published by NASSP and has about 25,000 readers. I am seeking manuscripts for the October issue about the state of humanities in public secondary schools. This forum is a wonderful exchange of ideas, and I'm so heartened to see the humanities being supported.I would love to hear about successful programs and strategies for keeping such classes strong in the face of challenges from…See More
Ken Egan replied to Humanities Roundtable's discussion 'The Trail Book Club - The Royal Wulff Murders'"Good response, Kathleen! You raise many questions for others to consider. Just two questions on my part: What do you make of Martha Ettinger, the lead detective (sheriff) in Royal Wulff Murders? She's a Montana woman who loves…"
"Did anyone notice Charles Johnson's article about the gubernatorial candidates, where Neil Livingstone promised to call a Constitutional Convention, in particular, to get rid of the "clean and healthful environment" language?"
© 2012 Created by Ken Egan.
