How did we let the Golden Globes back in?
I cannot believe the Golden Globes are back. How did this happen? Last year, a Times investigation revealed the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn.’s gift-expecting, early-access-demanding, pay-to-play approach to its awards and lack of any Black members. Everyone was outraged. Publicists threatened a massive boycott, Tom Cruise said he would return his statuary. NBC dumped the 2022 telecast.
Now, a year later, the Globes are back, announcing their nominations on live TV at the West Coast-obnoxious time of 5:45 a.m. Monday. And within minutes, nominated studios, producers and a few stars were dutifully expressing their gratitude.
I am not going to mention any of the nominations because they are pretty much what you would expect if, say, you had only watched the films and series that critics claimed had awards buzz.
Also because I would like to extend the blissful year in which we didn’t have to think about the Golden Globes.
When the Times investigation broke, I thought the HFPA could fix itself — I even offered a few notes. Then I experienced a year without the Golden Globes.
What a relief it was.
The Globes return to TV this year after a hiatus sparked by a Times investigation into the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. Here are the nominees.
Finally an awards cycle in which the 87 members of the HFPA would not be allowed to pretend they had any more insight into what was the “best” anything than 87 people standing in line for Splash Mountain. (Possibly they had less.) Finally a year when we did not have to watch a show in which a host inevitably reminds the audience that the HFPA is a joke and everyone is only here for the free booze and then winners feel obligated to express their emotional and sincere gratitude.
Daunted but not undone by NBC’s suspension, the HFPA promised to change (which almost immediately backfired when the just-hired diversity strategist quit), announced its winners this year at a private event with blessedly little coverage and returned to the business of clawing its way back into Hollywood’s good graces through the kind of redemptive arc the industry loves to cheer.
That arc, according to President Helen Hoehne and new diversity officer Neil Phillips, is now complete. There are a bunch of new members! Who are diverse! There is stricter membership policy and a universal gifts ban! That will be enforced! Some members are still paid by the HFPA, but they do stuff like form committees and it is tough being a journalist these days!
Whatever. Having finally been called out, the emperor can put on some clothes if he wants, but that doesn’t negate the fact that he was walking around naked for years — and gaslighting everyone in the kingdom about it.
People in the entertainment industry, and the media covering it, have been complaining about the HFPA’s freeloading and shakedown tactics for years. Occasionally members were caught. In 1999, as The Times’ Stacy Perman and Josh Rottenberg reported, HFPA members were forced to return 82 Coach watches, valued at more than $400 apiece, which had been given to them by USA Films.
The HFPA has come under pressure for not having any Black members as well as allegations of ethical and financial lapses raised in a Times investigation.
In 2011, the group was sued by its own publicist for accepting money and gifts in exchange for support of certain films; the HFPA countersued and the matter was settled out of court.
The Times investigation revealed that, prior to the absurd 2021 nomination for Netflix’s “Emily in Paris” in the best comedy category, the streamer had treated 30 HFPA members to a lavish trip to Paris. Yet rumors of similar perks prefaced virtually every nomination day. Last year, as Rottenberg and Perman reported, WarnerMedia summed up the attitude of many in a blistering letter to the HFPA: “For far too long,” WarnerMedia wrote, “demands for perks, special favors and unprofessional requests have been made to our teams and to others across the industry. We regret that as an industry, we have complained, but largely tolerated this behavior until now.”
I believe in change but let’s face it: The Golden Globes was created by a tiny, random and sketchily credentialed group of people to give themselves an absurd amount of influence in Hollywood, along with a pretty hefty income stream.
Do we need even a cleaned-up, racially diverse version of that?
Every year, there is a chorus of complaints about the number of awards shows. The guild awards, the various critics’ awards, the Spirit Awards, the People’s Choice Awards. How much praise, affirmation and hardware, many ask, do these Hollywood people need?
So why, having rid ourselves of one of the biggest and most superfluous ceremonies, are we bringing it back? Do not tell me it’s that we need a kick off to awards season with some sort of “Oscar indicator.” Critics’ awards would make far more sense as an opening volley (everyone loves to complain about critics) and as my colleague Glenn Whipp annually explains, with irritating accuracy, the guild awards — WGA, DGA and SAG — are the only Oscar barometers any one needs. Mostly because they are the same groups who actually vote in the Oscars!
Comic Jerrod Carmichael has been tapped to host the 80th Golden Globes as the transformed Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. steps back into the spotlight.
Alas, the only real reason to bring back the Golden Globes is the reason they existed in the first place: Money.
With dwindling viewership for pretty much everything, NBC doesn’t want to give up the chance to draw a largish live audience. Studios and producers don’t want to lose an opportunity, any opportunity, to promote their films and television series. Actors, writers, directors, et al., know that any nomination or win can boost their quote and/or help them get a future project off the ground. Media platforms, including this one, don’t want to lose the additional FYC ad revenue. The city of Los Angeles has whole micro-economies built on awards shows.
Think of all the stylists, limo drivers, florists, designers, restaurants and jewelers who work to make any big awards show happen. The Golden Globes may not be the Oscars, but the hotel bills are the same.
The HFPA is counting on the monetary benefits erasing, or at least outweighing, the dubious and historically corrupt nature of the Globes. That’s how they forced Hollywood to turn a blind eye for all those years.
NBC has only renewed its airing of the Globes telecast for a year, so we’ll see. If the show has a decent audience, if the stars turn up in their finery and at least a few acceptance speeches are funny or moving, if Jerrod Carmichael keeps the evening light and the list of winners is not completely outrageous — well, people may decide that whatever change the HFPA claims to have made is enough.
If not, well, wouldn’t it be nice to live in a world where we don’t have the Golden Globes to kick around anymore?
The biggest entertainment stories
Get our big stories about Hollywood, film, television, music, arts, culture and more right in your inbox as soon as they publish.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
