The Envelope Logo

Gold Derby

Tom O'Neil has the inside track on Oscars, Emmys, Grammys and all the award shows.

« Previous Post | Gold Derby Home | Next Post »

Will Golden Globe winners repeat at the Oscars? Will 'Avatar' romp again?

January 17, 2010 |  9:05 pm
Avatar Golden Globe winner news

Things we learned at the Golden Globes: Carey Mulligan ("An Education") and Gabourey Sidibe ("Precious") probably don't need to prepare an acceptance speech on Oscar night. Woody Harrelson ("The Messenger") didn't upset Christoph Waltz ("Inglourious Basterds"), so odds are decreasing that an upset can happen in that category. Oh, yeah, and "Avatar" won best picture.

Admit it. You wondered if "Avatar" would triumph after "The Hurt Locker" won two days ago at the Critics Choice Awards. It's one thing that "The Hurt Locker" swept the prizes bestowed by the critics in New York, L.A. and the national society earlier. Those are the snooty kind of print journos. Critics' Choice Awards are bestowed by the junket press — journos similar in sensibility to members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. It was a shockeroo that "The Hurt Locker" triumphed with the Yankee equivalent. If that victory had repeated with the foreign folks, it would've signaled a bizarre Oscar derby ahead. Bizarre because movies that don't have big stars, that make little money at the box office and are about the Iraqi war usually don't do well at the Academy Awards.

But "Avatar" prevailed at the Globes as expected. Beware: It's not a slam-dunk at the Oscars next where a sci-fi film has never won the top prize. Furthermore, the academy is using a weighted ballot to determine the winner out of 10 nominees instead of the usual system of having voters check off one preference out of five alternatives. That means anything can happen, including victories by "The Hurt Locker," "Up in the Air" or "Inglourious Basterds."

Jeff Bridges' ("Crazy Heart") victory at the Globes and Critics' Choice sure makes a repeat seem inevitable on Oscar night. Now he's got the Big Mo, but Bridges still needs to get past the Screen Actors' Guild Awards next week. Ditto for Sandra Bullock ("The Blind Side") and Meryl Streep ("Julie & Julia") ,who won both the Golden Globe and Critics Choice Award too.

Mo'Nique ("Precious") and Christoph Waltz ("Inglourious Basterds") now seem like locks in those supporting races.

Photo from "Avatar": 20th Century Fox

Get Gold Derby on Twitter. Join the Gold Derby Group at Facebook. Become friends with Tom O'Neil on Facebook. Get Gold Derby RSS feed via Facebook. RSS Feedburner. RSS Atom.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Karen Harper, Cisco and the Sandra Bullock bashers need to get a life. Would you say the same negative things about big dollar actresses like Julia Roberts, Reece Witherspoon, Angelina Jolie all who make as much or more than Sandra and all who have won Oscars? I don't recall "stunned" looks when Sandra won the Critics Choice or Golden Globe. How do you know her acceptance speech modesty is false? The fact is she gave a good performance in "The Blindside." Of course other actresses could have done a fine job with the role. Does this disqualify Sandra's performance? Would an Oscar victory for Sandra really be that painful for you.


Sandra Bullock over carey mulligan great performance

this is ajoke

the voters know that carey gave the best performance

but its not about whos better

its about who they choose to win

un fair

sorry for my english

Avatar's the front-runner, eh? ...So, where's Ferngully's Oscar then?

While it has virtually no chance of winning the big one, it would be nice to see The Hangover get one of those 10 slots for Best Picture. Many dismiss it as "Frat-boy" humor but it's one of the better character-driven comedy pieces I've seen in this life. It actually holds up better on secondary viewings.

One can only hope the Oscars won't have repeat winners from the Globes. Jeff Bridges is solid, as are Christoph Waltz and Mo'Nique. Meryl is strong but some academy members might have Meryl fatigue and choose to go with someone else...Sandra Bullock would be a disastrous choice and I don't think many academy members really take her acting don't be surprised if Carey or Garibe grab the gold guy instead. Best Director should go and will go to Kathryn Bigelow...well not only did she do an outstanding job with The Hurt Locker (that one actually thinks it was directed by a male) but it's high time to honor a woman for her directorial achievement. The Best Picture race is still up in the air (no pun intended)...really...Avatar still has a chance, but it all comes down to fickleness of the Academy. If the Academy wants to honor commerical appeal as well as box office bonzo it will go with Avatar or Up (if nominated). But if the Academy wants to honor artistic achievement over commercial appeal then The Hurt Locker or Precious would be the ideal choice. If Oscar winners are a repeat of the Globe winners, the Academy Awards will be boring and uneventful because the winners are already in place. So it would be best if the Academy spices it up and surprises all pundits and movie-going fans by throwing a wrench in its selections and bestowing its awards on something other than Avatar. Again don't be surprised if the Best Picture goes to a non top 5 front-runner like Avatar, Precious, Up In the Air, Inglorious Basterds or The Hurt Locker and maybe Up or even a Serious Man might walk away with the grand prize...but preferably the most deseving will be The Hurt Locker...If Up gets a nom for Best Pic and wins, it will be the first animated pic to win the top can happen!

Avatar will win best picture at the Academy Awards. Continuing the tradition of dead on, stirring films like The Hurt Locker being snubbed at these large holier than thou award ceremonies. “They should be content to be recognized by the people in their small scale awards shows - we'll be having none of that here!” I can imagine the academy saying. Yeah, it'll win and it's a crying shame.

I'm not taking anything away from the film in the least - it's as someone else posted "an entertaining film." with stunning visuals and a solid list of character performances, but outside of the visual aspect – is there anything groundbreaking about the film? I venture a daring answer and say “no”, it’s a diluted mixture of previous films that did so much more with a lot less. Avatar is a plethora of story lines blended together that in the end – it doesn’t know what it is. A story of man -joining an outcast race and becoming the central figurehead in that groups revolt against opposing forces. Dances with Wolves, Last of the Mohicans….and dozens upon dozens of others. And sure every story ever written borrows in some way from the past – and yet, so many of those films aren’t getting the glitz and glamour attention they deserve and fall by the way side in order to pay homage to large budget blockbusters directed by Hollywood’s elite.

And in talking of visual effects – as a whole picture I have to nod in approval that Avatar was nominated – that is not a falsehood by any stretch of the imagination. But when you’re talking about actors and their performances, my concern is that Avatar has set a bar, and it’s not entirely for the greater good. As this kind of technology grows, sure it’ll make movies more visually striking (an A+ for movie goers), but for those of us who aren’t content with just what’s on the surface and want to delve more deeply into the conceptualization of character and plot, more importantly, into what an actor brings and subsequently does with a role, this task will become increasingly more difficult. Where does the actors craft end and the CGI begin?? The lines have been forever blurred I’m afraid - imagine Avatar without the motion capture CGI….and what do you have? Its weak, exposed storyline with not much else to offer. Now imagine Little Miss Sunshine in total CGI – do you think it would have been nominated for best picture of the year as it was a few years ago if filmed completely in digital animation? I’ll defer back to my previous daring (and now double daring) answer: no. Let that sink in and you’ll begin to see why Avatar winning the academy award for best picture of the year is good for James Cameron and all those involved in making the film but not so much for everyone else.

Sandra Bullock winning anything more than a Nickelodeon Award is joke. Did she really win over Emily Blunt, Helen Mirren, Carey Mulligan, and Gabourey Sidibe? Disgraceful! All superior performances in superior movies.

Sorry to ask, but how will the weighted ballot work differently to the former balloting system?

My greatest fear is that Avatar will win at the Oscars so all those old people can show youngins that they like mainstream movies. Remeber the uproar when The Reader was nominated in place a The Dark Knight and Wall-E. The Academy may say "None of that this year."
The Hangover is a young person's film that deserves an oscar nod.

Important addition: Robert Downey Jr. should now be considered a contender for Best Actor, since he pulled off the Globes' biggest surprise (though it wasn't much of a surprise--everyone thought Daniel Day-Lewis would win, but by default since the HFPA looked like the "Nine" fan club). If he's nommed and the Oscars have indigestion over Bridges (as I think they will), he might actually win.

I still think the Best Actress race is wide-open. Since Meryl & Sandra competed in separate categories at the Globes (let's just forget about "The Proposal" now, shall we?), their wins were expected. But when you throw them together at the SAGs and Oscars, anything can happen--much like 1981, when everyone thought either "On Golden Pond" or "Reds" would win Best Picture but "Chariots of Fire" sneaked it away from them. I still think Carey or more likely Gabby will sneak it away.

In many ways Jeff Bridges is starting to look solid, but then I have a funny feeling the Oscars will treat him as another Mickey Rourke and think the nomination is enough. The question is, if not him, who? Clooney didn't come off that strong, Freeman's fading, and IB isn't strong enough to inject Brad Pitt into this race. Jeremy Renner, maybe (especially if Bigelow wins the DGA)?

I agree on both supporting races--they're over; the Academy might as well engrave Christoph's and Mo'Nique's names on their Oscars. In fact, Mo'Nique is so strong now that I can safely take back my wish that Mariah Carey not get a nom (even though I'm a fan); though Palm Springs set her back, she can now safely get a "it's great to be nominated" nom without ruining Mo'Nique's chances of winning.

Best Picture will depend heavily on the DGAs. If Cameron wins, "Avatar" will have the Oscar sewn up; maybe sci-fi has never won before, but it's too close to both "Titanic" and LOTR:ROTK for that to be a problem. If one of the others wins the DGA (especially Tarantino), it'll be a horse race for Best Picture between "Avatar" and the DGA winner, with a possible "Chariots of Fire"-like upset.

Lord of the Rings belongs to the fantasy genre, it is not science fiction.

While Christoph Waltz and Mo'Nique are the deserved Oscar locks, "Avatar" will not win a Best Picture trophy and that's certain. It's visually stunning and gives us groundbreaking special effects, but little else. The Academy members will honor a film whose painfully compelling subject matter affects all of us and that film is "The Hurt Locker."

Christoph Waltz did an outstanding job. Enjoyed the movie.

Where's Pia Zadora when you really need her?

I'm glad that Avatar won, some may say Hurt locker or other movie was better but if you look at the numbers that would be just a personnel opinion not view by the majority.
Movies are for entertainment, and if a movie can bring you back to see it again and again then it did it’s job. Any movie that can make money as quickly as Avatar deservers some credit, it did it’s job, brought people to the theaters.

Many movies try to copy what is going on today and they are well done but it’s just news and for me that’s where I can see it, on the news. When I go to the movies I don’t want to see the news I want enjoyment, a rollercoaster ride if can be. It’s funny how most of the times what the critics say is not what the box office says. You can’t go by what a group of a few has to say which to me seem like they may have lost their way and for got what entertainment is.

The sad think to me for Avatar is that it has performance capture, so the actors don’t seem to get any credit for there performance.
I thought Sam Worthington did a very good job but Zoe Saldana did a great job, way better then in Star Trek or other movie I can remember this year. Yet everyone see it as if it’s animation and don’t see that it’s a real actor or actress performing the part.
Hopefully someday people will look pass the visual on these type of movies and the performers will get their due.

Yes Avatar will rock again and it will break all records of Titanic

Karen Harper, you really need to get a life if something so insignificant upsets you like that, lol.

Calm down, Frodo... no science fiction movie has won the best picture Oscar, unless you're calling all that wizard stuff in LOTR "science."

I don't get the love for Carey Mulligan's performance, honestly. An Education tried too hard to be a serious chick flick. And because it was made in Britain, some people think it automatically classifies as an "art film". Make the same movie set in Texas and it wouldn't be "memorable".

Can't believe Avatar won. Or Cameron. That was really bad. At least Meryl Streep and Christopher Waltz won; loved Streep's touching speech [T Bone Streep, what a classic!].

You're forgetting about "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King."

I just think Meryl Streep deserves to win, she always has. Julie and Julia has the feel of a classic to whether she wins or not is immaterial to me.

This is unfair and so lame: Sandra Bullock can't act people!! She has NO TALENT! She's not a bad performer but she is not a good actress! Hollywood is so clueless....did you not see the crowd look back at her w/ shocked faces as if to say 'wtf'??? This is the kind of thing that makes the industry so f-up b/c Bullock is stealing from the true talents who can act! My God - tying w/ Meryl? REALLY??? What kind of crack are these voters smoking? The real Q is: how much money is Warner Bros sinking into this goofy girl next door's campaign for awards? It's a money thing and her publicists and team who have championed her campaign trail want her to win so they can up her salary and get bigger cuts from it - get a clue clueless America!
The irony of Sandra B is that she plays like she can act, she pretends to be modest (false modesty is worse than honest arrogance) and she is Warner Bros puppet. Since when is selling out and being a fame whore and money whore the nice girl-next-door thing to do?

If "Avatar", James Cameron, Sandra Bullock, Jason Reitman, or anyone/anything other than "The Hurt Locker", Kathryn Bigelow, or Meryl Streep wins the Oscar, I'm never going to watch the Oscars again. Besides the fact that "Avatar" was terrible and excruciating to watch, why is it even nominated? "Up in the Air" had no substance and no sense to the story. I didn't give a shit about the George Clooney in the end; it was pointless. Sandra Bullock really wasn't amazing and Meryl Streep should have been chagrined to be tied with her at the Critics' Choice. I really hope the Oscars doesn't turn out like last year where undeserving winners took home the Academy Award. Please don't let this be like the "Slumdog"/Sean Penn/Kate Winslet/Penelope Cruz wins.

Great show, congratulations to all! Congratulations to Mr. Scorsese and the history of cinema and its future. .



In Case You Missed It...

Stay Connected:

About the Blogger

Pop & Hiss



In Case You Missed It...