65th Annual Golden Globe Nominations

16 Comments »

1. the golden globes will continue to be a joke and it looks like 2008 is no different. pass the champagne.

   Comment by aspiringscreenwriter — December 13, 2007 @ 6:09 am

2. How does ‘There Will Be Blood’ get nominated for Best Picture & Actor, but Paul Thomas Anderson NOT get nominated as Director or for Script?

   Comment by crackler — December 13, 2007 @ 6:12 am

3. Was the Savages a comedy or a musical? I remember neither laughing much nor singing much. Maybe it was Philip Seymour Hoffman’s beautiful renditon of “I Will Always Love You” over the end titles that confused them.

   Comment by Lenny — December 13, 2007 @ 7:36 am

4. I think Ugly Betty got shafted. Otherwise, I’m fairly happy. Go Hairspray and Sweeny Todd! Oh, shut up, elitists. I’m a musicals geek.

   Comment by Caitlin — December 13, 2007 @ 7:41 am

5. Happy to see Donald Sutherland get a nom. Even if these things are meaningless, I’m enjoying his work on on DSM.

   Comment by buzzearl — December 13, 2007 @ 7:54 am

6. I Love your reporting Nikki Finke! I read you everyday and am learning a lot about the biz from you! The Golden Globes are a joke? Never heard that before!

   The Oscar noms are usually very similar to the globe noms, and the winners of both ceremonies are usually the same! I believe you though.

   Regardless I am very happy to see my favorite director Tim Burton finally nominated for Sweeny Todd! I have been a Burton fan since the begining and I fell like his talent has been overlooked all these years! He’s not weird he’s brilliant and I’m glad that he is finally receiving some well deservered and long over due recognition! I hope he will receive an Oscar nomintion and win as well!

   Cindy

   Comment by Cindy — December 13, 2007 @ 8:29 am

7. Nikki,

   You have Ricky Gervais listed for “The Office”. It should be for “Extras”.

   I’m glad to see “Eastern Promises” get top recognition.

   I thought Laura Linney deserved a nom for “The Savages”. The balance she achieved between comedy and tragedy in that performance as Wendy Savage was more complex and convincing than the work of any of the actresses who got nominated in her category.

   I hope “that Zodiac” won’t be forgotten by Academy voters. But it looks like that one is destined for “Fight Club” level cult status.

   Comment by justlearning — December 13, 2007 @ 9:17 am

8. Would someone please explain to me how Grey’s Anatomy continues to be nominated year after year no matter how badly its storylines and acting deteriorate? How much is ABC paying for that award? The show is a joke. That it could receive a nomination over Dexter, or be mentioned in the same breath as Mad Men or Big Love, is a disgrace. It’s an absolute joke. The day that Grey’s Anatomy is no longer taking spots away from other, more deserving nominees, is the day I start taking the Globes seriously again.

   Comment by galveston — December 13, 2007 @ 9:50 am

9. The Golden Globes are the most Craptastic awards in town.

   Comment by ReelBusy — December 13, 2007 @ 12:04 pm

10. a fetid load of HFPA knob-polishing and glad-handing. Didn’t any of these true douchebags see ONCE? Heartless bastards.

    American Gangster — bloated, irrelevant ** stars
    Atonement — (looks good)
    Eastern Promises — interesting ***
    The Great Debaters — (whatever)
    Michael Clayton — quality craftmanship ****
    No Country For Old Men — a schlong against the head **
    There Will Be Blood — (looks real good)

    Comment by Mark S. — December 13, 2007 @ 12:05 pm

11. My girl Sally Field is going to win so those other bitches can just stay home.

    Thank God there are some fresh faces on the list this year instead of the same stale old farts (though I notice William Shatner still managed to finagle a nom - who’s he got photos of?).

    Comment by Ruby Redlips — December 13, 2007 @ 2:05 pm

12. No nominations for “The Wire”? This is getting ridiculous. And does anybody remember a little film called “Knocked Up”. It came out earlier this year and (maybe it’s just me) I thought it was pretty funny.

    Comment by Writer In a 1 Bedroom — December 13, 2007 @ 4:03 pm

13. Will Gavin Palone please weigh in on this! I don’t know what to think without him…

    Comment by dante writer — December 13, 2007 @ 5:43 pm

14. Unless someone knows of a rule about it, the most bizarre nomination is for PERSEPOLIS. NOT for it getting a Foreign Film nod, but for NOT getting one for Animated Film.

    Are the Golden Globes voters saying that PERSEPOLIS is one of the 5 best movies made around the whole world last year, but it’s not better than something like BEE MOVIE that got nominated instead?! Huh? Are the Globes saying that if BEE MOVIE were made in Guatemala it would have bumped PERSEPOLIS out of the running for the Foreign Film slot?

    Anyone knows what gives here??

    Comment by Anon — December 14, 2007 @ 10:07 am

15. Re “PERSEPOLIS” not getting a Best Animation nod.

    The thinking might be that “PERSEPOLIS” as animation is not exceptional, but it tells an exceptional story (hence the Best Foreign Language film nod).

    That’s just a guess. I’m not saying that’s valid. I don’t know if “PERSEPOLIS” breaks any new ground with its animation techniques or execution.

    I’d be interested to hear what any animators think.

    I also agree that “THE WIRE” is a glaring omission.

    Comment by justlearning — December 14, 2007 @ 4:00 pm

16. Re: justlearning and PERSEPOLIS.

    I thought of that reasoning too, but that really shouldn’t be the reason. The nom is for Best Animated Film, not “Best Animation in a film”. That would be like denying a film a nomination in the Comedy category because it wasn’t “funny enough”.

    Anyone with a Golden Globes rulebook? Perhaps, PERSEPOLIS wasn’t eligible in the Animation category for some reason??

    Comment by Anon — December 15, 2007 @ 10:55 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment