Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 18 of 18
  1. #16
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    19,116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zauriel View Post
    I consider Golden Globes to be secondary Oscars as Wolf Prizes to be secondary Nobel prizes.

    The Golden Globes are younger and less prestigious than the Oscars.
    It's worse than that. The organization behind it has no credibility, given the corruption and the lack of respected names in the voting body. It worked as a win-win in the last few years (people tune in to watch celebrities, Celebrities view the Golden Globes as one stop on their Oscar campaign) but it was always precarious. And then the Golden Globe were on the wrong side of diversity initiatives.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  2. #17
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    With the Orishas
    Posts
    13,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tofali View Post
    If Awards are open to Studio campaigning and bribes then is it really impartial? Thank god for the awfulness of Emily In Paris and The Tourist opening ppl's eyes to the Golden Globes.

    Or the Martian winning for the best comedy and musical lol Their categories for movies are awful.
    Agreed 100%.

    The Emily in Paris thing was a complete fiasco.

  3. #18
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    The problem with the HFPC is the same problem we see with the Oscars, Grammys, Tony’s and even sites like Rotten Tomatoes. There is a lack of diversity and the white male is overly representative.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •