The hype has settled and the nominees are read, and thus the Golden Globes peek over the awards-season horizon. With their weird, sprayed-on lacquer glow comes a succession of questions and concerns: Julia Roberts? Tobey Maguire? It's Complicated? Believe it, believe it, and believe it. But that's just the start of the fun. As inconsequential as so many perceive the Golden Globes to be, there are plenty of viable story lines to consider among today's nominations on the film side. To wit:
1. As usual, these are not your Best Picture Oscar nominees.
It's really easy to get exercised about the quality of the Golden Globes nominees, but I've got to say it every year: These awards are based in no other reality beyond the one that a) has studios lobbying for any pre-Oscar visibility they can arrange and b) delivers ratings to NBC, which stabilizes TV licensing revenue for the shadowy nominating cabal known as the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. So while you might cringe today at the potential for It's Complicated or The Hangover to usurp those precious slots thought owed to Up or An Education, take a deep breath and step off the ledge.
2. Harvey Weinstein means business.
Around this time last year we witnessed The Weinstein Company's late-year Reader blitz start paying off. If you thought that was intense, wait until you see what Harvey uncorks for '09. Blessed with three movies of variously improved quality -- Inglourious Basterds, A Single Man, and Nine -- and the panoply of celebrated performances therein, you may very well see almost everything represented here also represented through the Academy. NB: In the Oscars' expanded Best Picture category, Harvey may very well be the only studio chief with two horses in the race. And why not? For once his titles actually deserve it.
3. Tobey Maguire. Hilarious.
Who does Jeremy Renner have to blow to get a Golden Globe nomination around here? Nobody, apparently -- but if, as one wag reported, your pal Leonardo DiCaprio throws a lavish pre-nomination party in your honor where the entire voting body goes home with a Blu-ray player, you'd probably get a Golden Globe nod as well. On the one hand it's just another reason not to take the Globes seriously. On the other, it's the kind of galvanizingly untoward behavior that reinforces your faith that the Academy will do right by Renner next month.
4. Sandra Bullock will win.
But for what? A predicted dual nominee for The Blind Side and The Proposal, she's not competing against herself a la Meryl Streep, which improves her odds even more than her already formidable, HFPA-dazzling star power in the dramatic category. Gabourey Sidibe will contend, but I'd just give Bullock the Dramatic Best Actress trophy now.
5. The Best Actor - Comedy/Musical category. Also hilarious.
When a sick child pukes in a grocery store, someone calls for a mop and a bucket. When the studios puke in a Golden Globes category, someone calls for a vote. What gives? Day-Lewis and Gordon-Levitt, fine. Damon and Stuhlbarg, sigh, I guess. Downey? Groan. And people complain there are no good comedic roles for women in this business.
6. Get ready for two and a half months of James Cameron/Kathryn Bigelow trend pieces...
The formerly married (um, to each other) Best Director nominees are also the front-runners for Academy consideration in March. If you thought those Josh Brolin/Javier Bardem and Mickey Rourke/Sean Penn love-ins in '07 and '08 were annoying, you might want to tune out until spring.
7. ...and joint Christoph Waltz/Mo'Nique photos.
They're likely to win out for the rest of the season, making their requisite Supporting Actor/Actress pictures the one guaranteed get for every press room along the way. By Oscar night, they'll probably feel like they're married.