A watered-down press conference

I caught a few minutes of the Golden Globes last night, just to see what the "press conference" style of this awards shows would be like—and to get a taste of what the Oscar ceremony might morph into in another month, should the writer strike go unresolved.

I have to say, it was quite different than what I had expected. I mean, I had kinda toned down my vision of an awards ceremony, but I guess I hadn't realized just how bare bones this might be with only the two hosts naming the nominees and winners. No red carpet, no audience of stars, no winners' speeches . . . and most of all, no suspense! That's what I enjoy the most about the Oscars: when you have a highly competitive category, or when you have someone you're cheering on so strongly to win, the suspense increases to maddening levels right up to the moment the announcers' lips move to name the winner. There was hardly any of that last night when I watched the last 20 minutes of the Golden Globes.

You could easily argue that the Golden Globes had been reduced to its very essence, but without all the above-mentioned elements, a great deal seemed lacking. In short, it wasn't really any fun—as several others noted. Granted, I don't require the whole event to be glamorous and glitzy, but it is nice to see all of Hollywood come out and bear witness to the ceremony.

I just hope that, come next month's Oscar ceremony, the writer strike will either be resolved or that the ceremony will continue as planned—just off the cuff, rather than scripted.

On another interesting note, I caught some of the earlier evening's results on IMDb . . . and saw that some of the winners were announced there before they were even announced on TV! (Inside information, anyone?)