Comic duo Fey, Poehler stand out in otherwise dreary award show

by Jeffrey Robinowitz ’17, Staff Writer 

It is a well-known fact that the Golden Globes is a far cry from the quality and prestige of the Academy Awards, and this year’s show made that even more apparent. With forgettable entertainment and predictable winners, this year’s Golden Globes was more of the same awards season slop we’ve come to expect around January.

On the whole the night was almost completely lacking in quality entertainment. Tina Fey and Amy Poehler are undeniably a great hosting duo; however, the show can only be great when that duo is actually on stage. Unfortunately for this broadcast, Fey and Poehler had to take backstage to several long, dull speeches that should have been played out hours ago (seriously who is Jacqueline Bisset, and why am I still listening to her nonsensical ramblings?) and there was an absurdly large amount of time that was spent watching people walk to the stage.

While the tighter schedule of the Golden Globes is certainly appreciated when compared to the infamously long runtimes often seen at the Oscars, this setup does not seem to leave much room for content outside giving out awards. This makes the show a three-hour marathon of people getting trophies with little entertainment for viewers.

However, the entertainment value of the Golden Globes usually benefits from its less predictable selection of winners. I say “usually” because this year was a spectacular exception. This year’s winners were so predictable that they might as well have handed out the awards before the show even began.

12 Years A Slave won best motion picture, drama, and Alfonso Cuaron won best director for Gravity (two events that are likely to be repeated on the Oscars), while Cate Blanchett, Matthew McConaughey, Jared Leto, and Jennifer Lawrence all won in their categories — more outcomes we should expect to see during the Academy Awards.

The winners for television were equally unexciting. Breaking Bad picked up wins for best TV series, drama and best actor in a TV series, drama for Bryan Cranston, while Michael Douglas got best actor in a miniseries or TV movie for his portrayal of Liberace in Behind the Candelabra, which won best TV movie or miniseries.

Other than the fantastic surprise that came in the form of Andy Samberg and Amy Poehler, two former SNL classmates, winning best actor and actress in a TV series, musical, or comedy, the Golden Globes was largely devoid of any genuine shock or surprise.

Predictable is not inherently a bad thing, and there is certainly nothing wrong with deserving actors, programs, and films winning awards, but predictability leads to boredom. When viewers have a thousand channels to choose from, they start wondering why they are watching the dreary mess and ultimately change the channel.

However, if you were a person who came into the night expecting grade-A entertainment and show-stopping surprises, you should know you came to the wrong place. The Golden Globes will never have the high quality entertainment or prestige the Academy Awards has, but that does not mean it is worthless. By virtue of its division between dramatic works and comedic or musical works, the Golden Globes is able to honor actors who probably will not get recognized come Oscar night, so often-overlooked actors like Leonardo DiCaprio get the hard-earned honors they deserve.

Besides, the well known fact that the Globes are not as serious or esteemed as the Oscars means we get to see our favorite stars in a completely different light: a little more relaxed, a lot more drunk, and a hell of a lot more open to swearing. So as March approaches and the Academy Awards near closer, just remember this: the Oscars might be more honorable, but the show definitely is not as real as the Golden Globes.

 First-year Jeffrey Robinowitz is a staff writer. His email is