Untangling the Golden Globes-Oscars connection

Many in Hollywood will be biting their fingernails Thursday morning as the Golden Globe nominations are announced. Among them will be many actors whose ultimate goal is to earn an Academy Award nomination next month. Should they despair about their prospects for an Oscar if their name is not among those short-listed for a Globe? I did a little research to try to find out.

The bottom line?

It is extremely unlikely that a lead actor or lead actress not nominated at the Globes (in either of the two categories for lead actors and lead actresses) will be nominated at the Oscars. Indeed, over the past 10 years, only six actors and five actresses have been. They were:

Best Actor

• Ed Harris ("Pollock," 2000)
• Sean Penn ("I Am Sam," 2001)
• Tom Wilkinson ("In the Bedroom," 2001)
• Clint Eastwood ("Million Dollar Baby," 2004)
• Ryan Gosling ("Half Nelson," 2006)
• Tommy Lee Jones ("In the Valley of Elah," 2007)

Best Actress

• Keisha Castle-Hughes ("Whale Rider," 2003)
• Samantha Morton ("In America," 2003)
• Naomi Watts ("21 Grams," 2003)
• Catalina Sandino Moreno ("Maria Full of Grace," 2004)
• Laura Linney ("The Savages," 2007)

It is, however, extremely likely that one or two supporting actors or supporting actresses not nominated at the Globes will be nominated at the Oscars. (The fact that both bodies feature only five nominees in each supporting category, unlike the leading categories in which the Globes nominate five more individuals than the Oscars, naturally decreases the likelihood that the Oscars will pick the same performances.) Indeed, over the past 10 years, 12 actors and 11 actresses have been. They were:

Best Supporting Actor

• Ethan Hawke ("Training Day," 2001)
• Ian McKellen ("The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring," 2001)
• Christopher Walken ("Catch Me If You Can," 2002)
• Benicio Del Toro ("21 Grams," 2003)
• Djimon Hounsou ("In America," 2003) The Globes must not like him, huh?
• Alan Alda ("The Aviator," 2004)
• Jake Gyllenhaal ("Brokeback Mountain," 2005)
• William Hurt ("A History of Violence," 2005)
• Alan Arkin ("Little Miss Sunshine," 2006) WON the Oscar! 
• Jackie Earle Haley ("Little Children," 2006)
• Djimon Hounsou ("Blood Diamond," 2006) Twice! The Globes really must not like him...
• Hal Holbrook ("Into the Wild," 2007)

Best Supporting Actress

• Toni Collette ("The Sixth Sense," 1999)
• Marcia Gay Harden ("Pollock," 2000) WON the Oscar! The Globes must not like her, huh?
• Julianne Moore ("The Hours," 2002)
• Catherine Zeta-Jones ("Chicago," 2002)* WON the Oscar!
  
• Shohreh Aghdashloo ("House of Sand and Fog," 2003)
• Marcia Gay Harden ("Mystic River," 2003) Twice! The Globes really must not like her...
• Sophie Okonedo ("Hotel Rwanda," 2004)
• Amy Adams ("Junebug," 2005)
• Catherine Keener ("Capote," 2005)
• Abigail Breslin ("Little Miss Sunshine," 2006)
• Ruby Dee ("American Gangster," 2007)

(*This performance was nominated in the lead category at the Globes and in the supporting category at the Oscars.)

Can we deduce anything from the instances in which the Globes went one way and the Oscars went another? Only something that we basically already knew: All things being equal, the HFPA will almost always nominate a celebrity over an actor's actor, whereas the AMPAS will almost always nominate an actor's actor over a celebrity.

To get a better sense of what I'm talking about, let's focus on the two categories in which the Globes and Oscars both had to single out five performances: supporting actor and supporting actress. Check out the following list of performances that the Globes chose to nominate that the Oscars did not (see above for their choices), and you'll immediately recognize just how shameless the HFPA is — and that they have a rather weird fetish for Cameron Diaz...

Best Supporting Actor

• Steve Buscemi ("Ghost World," 2001) Fair enough.
• Hayden Christensen ("Life As a House," 2001) They were just really pumped for "Star Wars."
• Jude Law ("A.I.: Artificial Intelligence," 2001) What?!
• Dennis Quaid ("Far From Heaven," 2002) Fair enough.
• Albert Finney ("Big Fish," 2003) It's '60s night at the Globes!
• William H. Macy ("Seabiscuit," 2003) Fair enough.
• David Carradine ("Kill Bill: Volume 2," 2004) Riiight.
• Will Ferrell ("The Producers," 2005) Sooo awards-worthy...
• Bob Hoskins ("Mrs. Henderson Presents," 2005) Fair enough. 
• Ben Affleck ("Hollywoodland," 2006) Guess who's coming to the party?!
• Jack Nicholson ("The Departed," 2006) Fair enough.
• Brad Pitt ("Babel," 2006) Guess who's coming to the party?! 
• John Travolta ("Hairspray," 2007) Oy...

Best Supporting Actress

• Cameron Diaz ("Being John Malkovich," 1999) Really?
• Natalie Portman ("Anywhere but Here," 1999) OK, I guess...
• Catherine Zeta-Jones ("Traffic," 2000) She's quite sexy, no?
• Cameron Diaz ("Vanilla Sky," 2001) Again?! 
• Cameron Diaz ("Gangs of New York," 2002) Third time's the charm.... I just threw up in my mouth a little.
• Susan Sarandon ("Igby Goes Down," 2002) Hey, she's a big name!
• Maria Bello ("The Cooler," 2003) Fair enough. 
• Hope Davis ("American Splendor," 2003) Fair enough. 
• Meryl Streep ("The Manchurian Candidate," 2004) Big star! So-so movie...
• Scarlett Johansson ("Match Point," 2005) Hmm...
• Shirley MacLaine ("In Her Shoes," 2005) Really? 
• Emily Blunt ("The Devil Wears Prada," 2006) Fair enough. 
• Julia Roberts ("Charlie Wilson's War," 2007) They're joking, right?

In conclusion, the following contenders should not get overly confident about the Oscars if they show up Thursday (but should worry if they don't)....

Best Actor

• Josh Brolin ("W.")
• Leonardo DiCaprio ("Revolutionary Road")
• Dustin Hoffman ("Last Chance Harvey")
• Hugh Jackman ("Australia")
• Brad Pitt ("The Curious Case of Benjamin Button")
• Will Smith ("Seven Pounds")

Best Actress

• Angelina Jolie ("The Changeling")
• Nicole Kidman ("Australia")
• Keira Knightley ("The Duchess")

Best Supporting Actor

• Josh Brolin ("Milk")
• James Franco ("Milk")
• Robert Downey Jr. ("Tropic Thunder")
• Philip Seymour Hoffman ("Doubt")

Best Supporting Actress

• Amy Adams ("Doubt")
• Rosario Dawson ("Seven Pounds")
• Queen Latifah ("The Secret Life of Bees")
• Marisa Tomei ("The Wrestler")
• Debra Winger ("Rachel Getting Married")

And the following contenders should not get overly worried about the Oscars if they do not show up Thursday (but have reason to feel very good if they do)....

Best Actor

• Richard Jenkins ("The Visitor")
• Frank Langella ("Frost/Nixon")
• Mark Ruffalo ("What Doesn't Kill You")

Best Actress

• Melissa Leo ("Frozen River")
• Kristin Scott Thomas ("I've Loved You So Long")
• Michelle Williams ("Wendy and Lucy")

Best Supporting Actor

• David Kross ("The Reader")
• Dev Patel ("Slumdog Millionaire")
• Michael Shannon ("Revolutionary Road")

Best Supporting Actress

• Kathy Bates ("Revolutionary Road")
• Viola Davis ("Doubt")
• Rosemarie DeWitt ("Rachel Getting Married")

---

Photo: Abigail Breslin in "Little Miss Sunshine," who got a nod from the Oscars without a nod from the Globes. Credit: Fox Searchlight.

Comments

[Robert Hamer]

"All things being equal, the HFPA will almost always nominate a celebrity over an actor's actor, whereas the AMPAS will almost always nominate an actor's actor over a celebrity."

This is precisely the reason why the Golden Globes have become so worthless. It seems as if all you need for a nomination is a marketable name and semi-good reps and BAM! Golden Globe nominee.

The last respectable thing they ever did over the Oscars was award their Best Picture - Drama to Brokeback Mountain in 2005 when AMPAS went to that piece of garbage from Paul Haggis.

[Carlos Balbás-Espín]

What you say is true: the HFPA will always nominate a celebrity over an actor's actor. I mean, to mind-bogglingly nominate Tom Cruise over way more deserving candidates like, say, ANY of the guys in "Milk", is just laughable.

However, it's rather obvious how much you loathe them. That of course makes you terribly biased, and therefore, unfair and much less credible.

In the list you say proves "just how shameless the HFPA is", there are several performances you don't categorize as "fair enough" that were actually good and very much deserving of their Golden Globe nomination. So good in fact, that they would have been easily at home with an Oscar nomination. Let's see:

*Hayden Christensen ("Life As a House," 2001) They were just really pumped for "Star Wars."
They may have (and how disappointed they must have been!), but critics hailed this performance too.
Other accolades: He won the National Board of Review Award for Breakthough Performance and was also nominated by the Online Film Critics Society and this little thing called the Screen Actors Guild.

*Jude Law ("A.I.: Artificial Intelligence," 2001) What?!
Watch the film if you haven't. The pretty boy can act.
Other accolades: Also nominated by the Chicago Film Critics Association, the Online Film Critics Society and the Phoenix Film Critics Society.

*Albert Finney ("Big Fish," 2003) It's '60s night at the Globes!
What's that even mean? Now old people can't act?
Other accolades: Also nominated for a little thing called BAFTA Award.

*Ben Affleck ("Hollywoodland," 2006) Guess who's coming to the party?!
Most critics said this was both his comeback performance and his best to date.
Other accolades: Won the Volpi Cup at the Venice Film Festival, and was also nominated by the Broadcast Film Critics Association and the Chicago Film Critics Association.

*Brad Pitt ("Babel," 2006) Guess who's coming to the party?!
Most critics said this was his best performance to date.
Other accolades: Also nominated by the Chicago Film Critics Association.

*Catherine Zeta-Jones ("Traffic," 2000) She's quite sexy, no?
Not just sexy, she's incredibly hot, but critics did like this performance.
Other accolades: Also nominated by the Chicago Film Critics Association.

*Susan Sarandon ("Igby Goes Down," 2002) Hey, she's a big name!
Yeah, she is, but have you seen the movie? She was fantastic.
Other accolades: Won the Las Vegas Film Critics Society Award.

*Meryl Streep ("The Manchurian Candidate," 2004) Big star! So-so movie...
Hey, maybe that's why they DID NOT nominate the movie. It's certainly not as good as THE Manchurian Candidate, but everyone is great in it, specially Meryl, and that's what saved it. Crititcs agreed. But saying the film was bad is a pretty lame excuse anyway, since it IS possible to find good (even great!) acting in terrible films. So perhaps it would have been more accurate to write 'Big star! So-so movie... Superb acting!'?
Other accolades: Also nominated for a BAFTA.

And then there's Cameron:

*Cameron Diaz ("Being John Malkovich," 1999) Really?
Ok, they do seem to have a weird fetish for her, but this was a great performance.
Other accolades: Also nominated by The Chlotrudis Society for Independent Film, the Las Vegas Film Critics Society and the Online Film Critics Society. Oh, and for both a BAFTA Award and a SAG Award too!

*Cameron Diaz ("Vanilla Sky," 2001) Again?!
Yes, again, because her performance was so good it stood out in an otherwise mediocre remake of a great film.
Other accolades: Won the Boston Society of Film Critics Award, the Chicago Film Critics Association Award, and was also nominated by the Broadcast Film Critics Association, the Phoenix Film Critics Society. Not to mention the SAG (again) and the American Film Intitute.

*Cameron Diaz ("Gangs of New York," 2002) Third time's the charm.... I just threw up in my mouth a little.
Now, that nomination was not only gratuitous, but plain wrong.

Final word: just chill dude, and stop the hatin'.

[Scott Feinberg]

Carlos,
Thanks for reading my post so carefully and sharing your disagreements. Next time I write a post of this nature, I will make a concerted effort to stop the hatin'!
Scott

[Melinda]

I would respectfully argue the exact opposite of what you contend. It seems to me the Oscars are all about celebrity and marketing and "campaigning" and box office bonanza, whereas the Globes much more often seem to go by merit of performance. Your list of best actors for the Globes actually argues against your point. These are mainly actors of substance. And I cannot fathom the remark about Albert Finney and "'60s night" Finney is an actor who has brought in consistently excellent performances for decades and has never bought into hype and mainstream propaganda. He is an "actor's actor" by definition. In fact, the only actor on that list who could truly prove your point is Brad Pitt. More celebrity there than towering talent. The rest are all fine actors, even if Nicholson and Travolta are also major celebrities. I think you should reexamine the premise of your argument.