How to Deal with the Golden Globes

Okay, now they're just trolling us.

The Golden Globes have never been without controversy. In fact, controversy is sort of their brand.

And one way they perpetuate controversy is with who they nominate.

Some of it is unapologetic, celebrity-courting by nominating people strictly based on wanting them to show up at their ceremony (Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie in The Tourist) and some of it is picking bizarre movies, shows, and performances to nominate just to look different.

That's how the awards went from being an Oscar indicator ended up being out-of-line with the final results at the Oscars and the Emmys, and how they ended up being very predictable despite their best efforts to surprise.

The number of awards for Best Lead Actress in a Drama series that went to an actress in the first season of her trendy television show is somewhere in the high teens (Jessica Alba, Toni Collette, Laura Dern, the list goes on) and there were moments like the underrated and underappreciated Party of Five wearing Best Drama Series that made the Globes look like they were championing the underdog.

While that may have been the case at one time, now they're chasing clicks just like the rest of us.

All of that is disappointing, but not necessarily a problem.

The Golden Globes are very open about being one big party, but unfortunately, they get way too many eyes on them to dismiss their impact. Even when their nominations moved from "questionable" to "confusing" to "Matt Damon in The Martian for Best Actor in a Comedy?" the awards still helped amplify the pedigree of certain films and shows over others, and that means, we can't let them off the hook, and, in fact, we need to fix this Eurotrash mess.

And normally, I wouldn't even bother, but there seems to be an obvious way to accomplish that--

Put pressure on the Hollywood Foreign Press.

They're not some secretive body that hides out in underground bunkers.

When the Academy messes up, there are people who do interviews and put out statements to address it. It doesn't mean it fixes the problem, but any progress we've made is because of that pressure, and yet, when the HFPA makes the same mistakes, nobody from their organization is asked about it. Nobody has to make a statement. Nobody has to take any responsibility at all.

You could argue that a collective body is going to be hard to hold accountable, and yet, we do that all the time with lots of other collective bodies.

When was the last time you heard about the HFPA needing to diversify their membership the way the Film Academy has?

They've also figured out that old insidious trick of getting it right some of the time in order to cultivate their defenders. There are instances where they champion lesser known work, and that makes it harder to come after them, because we often act as though criticism has to be about all of one thing instead of smaller issues that add up to a bigger problem.

Accessibility is also an issue, but not just with the Globes. The fact that you can show a film to a body of fifteen or even a hundred people and have that film be competitive at a time when getting your film out to audiences has never been easier should be widely taken to task.

It's no longer acceptable to simply say "Who has seen Music?"

The question that should be asked is "Why haven't I been able to see Music?"

It's one thing to pull that old trick of releasing your film in New York or LA to have it qualify for awards, but now, your film only has to premiere at a film festival, which means we're seemingly disconnected from what are considered to be notable films.

In the case of the Golden Globes, I'm not sure there even are rules about qualifications and release dates.

And I think that the excuse we use about art being subjective has allowed for objective bias, prejudice, and racism to flourish.

Television shows like I May Destroy You and Insecure and films like Da 5 Bloods not being nominated are not instances where we have to shrug it off and say that awards don't matter, because--they do.

They get your show renewed.

They get more viewers for your show.

And while none of us may like that that's how it works...that's how it works until we find another way to work it.

Somebody has to answer for Emily in Paris is a better show than I May Destroy You. If people are going to use "Art is subjective" as an excuse, the response should be that art is also a conversation. You can't have it both ways. You can't say "We can pick whatever we want, because it's about personal preference and we don't have to explain what our criteria is or talk about what we like about one piece of culture as opposed to what we don't like about another."

The Golden Globes are a cocktail party cosplaying as an awards show, but they have clout, like it or not.

And with clout comes responsibilities.

And the occasional fake gold trophy.