The Hot Blog

Can't watch but I hope Terrence Howard pulls one out.

My hopes:

Best Drama: A History of Violence (won't happen though)
Best Comedy: The Squid and the Whale (also won't happen)

Best Actors: Heath Ledger and Jeff Daniels
Best Actresses: Maria Bello and Reese Witherspoon
Supporting: Paul Giamatti and Michelle Williams
Director: Spielberg for Munich

Never say never Jeffmcm. Never say never.

I wouldn't want to be anywhere near Dave Cullen's site if BBM doesn't close this out. Kinda like not wanting to be around Peyton Manning last night.

I want to think Jeff Daniels has a good shot. He's my choice.

Never.

(Sorry, I was never good at following instructions )

Josh: thanks for introducing the long-running Brokeback discussion into the thread. We could have avoided it, but no.

I didn't mind Rachel winning. Constant Gardener was a very good movie and she was great in it.

As long as BBM still wins BEst Pic...

Not talk BBM at the Gay Globes?

Never.

I'll stand my comment. You're going to have a lot of upset and angry people if BBM doesn't walk away with this award and the Oscar. They're going to take it very personally. And as Sonny Corleone says. This is business.

Are you still standing by your suicide comment as your expected outcome?

Hugh Laurie gave a really great speech there.

I hate tape delay. I already know who won the first hour of awards and in the Pacific time zone the show starts in two hours.

I won't watch since 24 will be on, and frankly, I care more about the trials of Jack Bauer than the Hollywood Foreign Press, but I'm glad to see Clooney and Weisz win...I was hoping for Giamatti, but Clooney was really good in Syriana. He's a bit of a Globe darling is he not?

The big winner?

Kiefer Sutherland.

Cause I'll be watching his show tonight.

Shows pretty boring so far...Hugh Laurie and Geena Davis gave the best speeches so far... I'm glad Weisz won..she does deserve it, not only for her performance but her gracious nature at promoting it.

You know when the Globes will be taken seriously by everyone? When they are shown live on both coasts and everywhere in between...

Reese Witherspoon winning here has got to make her the single biggest lock for the Oscar win at this point.

I cut open a vein when BBM didn't win best supporting actress, but taped it up when it won screenplay.

The Globes can't be taken seriously by anyone. It's a fun night, some nice big star wins and an open bar but that's about it. It's 60 something foreign journalists. How is that a precursor to Oscar?

Reese is the odds on favorite but Felicity Huffman can give her a nice run for her money.

Joaquin AND Reese get Golden Globes? Awwwriiiight!!!! AND "Walk the Line" itself? Fan-freakin'-tatsic!

And I must admit: I was ridiculously amused to hear the Target ad with "Nothing Can Change the Shape of Things to Come" -- a song from the soundtrcak of "Wild in the Streets" (1968).

So, are the Brokeback-haters getting ready for their suicide tonight?

I guess It goes both ways, right?

Good news for Hoffman. Are the BBM supporters ready to play nice?

"Brokeback" rules. End of story.

So it does. So it does.

AND THE OSCARS GO TO

Brokeback
Ang Lee
Hoffman
Witherspoon

It seems to me that these categories are pretty much locks after this. Supporting actor categories are still open; we'll know more after the guilds.

Woohoo, Brokeback rules once again. I hope my Ennis still has a fighting chance.

Cheers to Brokeback Mountain!

Wow, this was boring. Reese was adorable, but still, no surprises, a lot of awkward presentations and bad speeches... I hope Jon Stewart can liven up the Oscars somewhat.

Since when have the Globes guaranteed Oscar?

I guess no one remember last year and The Aviator. How quickly you forget.

To me the big story was the snub of the Desperate Housewomen. Mary Louise rocks!

To me the low point was Dennis Quaid with his chick-flick-rhyming intro for Brokeback Mountain. What the heck! Did you happen to write his intro, David?

Two movies that probably got hurt by the Globes? "Crash," which didn't have much to work with and suffered from the combined screenplay category, and "Squid and The Whale," which, to be taken seriously as a contender, really needed to win one of the big prizes here.

As to the Aviator, the Globes split BP Drama (which went to the Aviator) and Director (which went to Clint Eastwood) and screenplay (which went to Sideways). This year Brokeback won all three and has also pretty much won everything else in sight. If there is an upset in the Guilds--if Ang Lee doesn't win, for example--then maybe things will change. But I think that is extremely unlikely.

Steve, those are good points. I'd like to add that the release strategy of Brokeback is similar to Million Dollar Baby (unlike Aviator). It will finally start to be seen widely just after these Globes win and just before the Oscar nominations. Even Academy members who had some disdain for it may now find themselves seriously considering it when it'll be playing in the neighborhood theater.

Ang Lee won the DGA and lost the Oscar a few years ago. Anyone think the Oscar voters will give it to him this year to make up for it?

I certainly hope so, Ang deserves it.

Aww... I was hoping Crash would win enough to make it the other serious contender besides BM in the media. Oh well. :(

I think the media's going to latch onto Walk The Line instead, and that's all we'll hear about from now to the Oscars WTL vs. BM!!!

So, all you BM-haters, you'll have to move your support from Munich to Carter-Cash.

Actually, I think Crash IS the other serious player other than Brokeback. Walk The Line is a mediocre movie with two good to excellent lead performances, Good Night is too small, and Munich is viewed as a commercial/critical disappointment. I think it'll resonate better with L.A. centric voters than it did with the HFPA.

So the new talking points for the Brokeback haters are:
1) The Globes don't matter.
2) When Brokeback doesn't win Best Picture you're all going to kill yourselves because the disappointment will be that much greater.

Bring it on, as they say.

I seriously doubt that Walk the Line will be the real competition for BBM. The next significant precursors are the guild awards, and WTL was not not nominated by the directors or the writers guilds, so WTL can't really pick up support from the guilds. Plus WTL really hasn't won any of the signficant precursor awards.

I think that WTL will be nominated for best picture, that Witherspoon (who is an absolute lock to win) and Phoenix will be nominated and that the Academy will consider that to be enough of a reward.

Best speech: Steve Carrell, the guy is funny and very lovable.

What's up with Phillip Seymour? He never mentions Truman Capote in his speeches!!!!

Love that BBM won. Best speeches Felicity & Sandra Oh.

Worst win, for me: John Williams for Memoirs of a Geisha. The worst of the four scores he wrote this year.

The real winner tonight may have been Jack Bauer. It will be interesting to see what the ratings look like this year with WTL being the only nominee that's a box office hit.

You can really call the Globes the Gay Globes now. Brokeback, Hoffman and Huffman.

Felicity's speech is below. Hurrah for queers everywhere!

"I know as actors our job is usually to shed our skins, but I think as people our job is to become who we really are and so I would like to salute the men and women who brave ostracism, alienation and a life lived on the margins to become who they really are,"

The Globes win doesn't mean much without "Munich" being there.

That speech of Felicity is awesome.

Munich was there. Spielberg lost. If he'd won, then people would begin thinking about last year when Eastwood won. Bur Spielberg didn't win. The only thing that could bring Munich back to life is if Spielberg wins the DGA, which is unlikely.

The best part was when Jack Bauer sacrificed his secure position to save the hostages who...

Oh, sorry. Wrong show.

24 sure kicked ass though!

Jack kicked some major ass on 24, the suspense in Monday's show was through the roof.

Interesting tidbits from OscarWatch:

"For a film to win screenplay, director and picture at the globes is quite rare. It happens, just not very often. The last time was when American Beauty swept most of the awards leading up to the Globes and the Oscars in 1999 (SAG, WGA, DGA, etc). And before that, you have to go back to Schindler's List. And then Dances With Wolves. What do these three films have in common? They also were sweeping most every other award as well. That is some awards heft, folks. Weirdly enough, Born on the Fourth of July also swept but the Oscar went to Driving Miss Daisy. So there is precedent for the film to go on NOT to win the Oscar. It is more likely it will."

It's official. Brokeback is the greatest movie of all time and will live in infamy.

You know, Josh, every time you post, you feed the fire.

Blackcloud, you're right. About 5 years ago, Ang Lee won the DGA (and the Golden Globe and the BAFTA) for directing ''Crouching Tiger,'' but lost the Oscar. He's now won the vast majority of critics' awards for Best Director, and the Broadcast Film Critics and the Golden Globe. He's got to be the front-runner. If he wins the Oscar, it'll be because the majority of Academy voters think he deserves it. It's not a makeup prize.

Tonight's Globes could've thrown a monkeywrench into things. Tom O'Neil at GoldDerby has been making the case that he expected George Clooney to win because the Globes love actor-directors. Earlier today, I check the stats and discovered that in the past five years, Best Director and Best Drama have only matched up once: when the third part of ''Lord of the Rings'' and Peter Jackson won. In the other four times, it was ''Aviator''/Eastwood; ''Hours''/Scorsese; ''A Beautiful Mind''/Altman, and ''Gladiator''/Lee.

Needless to say, Lee's win only solidified his front-runner status; let's see what the DGA does. As we know, this was a turning point last year for Eastwood. He won the Golden Globe and then the DGA, and that led to the Oscar.

I can't wait to see how Roger Friedman spins this in his 411 column at Fox News. On Dec. 28, he predicted: ''If the Globes go bigtime for 'Brokeback Mountain,' this could be the death knell for the film ... it could be curtains for the rodeo romance and set the stage for a 'Munich' march to the Oscars.''

I don't understand what Friedman was talking about there. Surely he meant 'if the Globes snub Brokeback', right?

Fine Brokeback people. Have another apple martini. You win the battle tonight. And the likely Oscar now. But we will win the war.

Why? Because heterosexuals...

- Get to have intercourse with women. And vaginas are the best thing in the world. Better than biscuits even.
- Get to have their kids look like both of em. Gay offspring must be either one partner and/or David Crosby. Barf!
- Have no issues figuring out who pays on our dinner dates. You people have to go dutch. (okay that does kinda suck for us)
- Don't have to talk in that requisite 'lispy accent.' Our speech patterns are all over the place.
- According to Pat Robertson get to go to heaven to meet cool people like Jimi Hendrix & Colonel Sanders. In hell, you gotta hang with Hilter and L. Ron Hubbard.
- When mugged don't have to worry if it might be because we're gay. Nope, my skull was cracked open because they just wanted my money. Ha ha!
- Know all the Brokeback actors are still on OUR team. They're only pretending to be like you! Ha! Ha! Ha!

So there.

2 questions arose for me...

1. How can a movie win best comedy/musical picture, both acting awards and not even get a best director nod?? James Mangold got screwed.

2. Will Harvey Weinstein now put all his weight behind Felicity Huffman and get her the Oscar? Harvey's been awful quiet lately...time for a comeback!

He can try, but Reese Witherspoon seems like a dead-cert lock for Best Actress. I think all the gay energy will go in Brokeback's direction, leaving Huffman out.

Jeffmcm, no, that's exactly what he meant. I didn't quote his entire analogy, but he compares ''Brokeback'' to last year's ''Sideways.'' He says ''Sideways'' won critics' prizes, but by the time of the Globes, people were burnt-out and tired of it, so they turned to ''Million Dollar Baby.'' He imagines the same thing will happen to ''Brokeback'' and believes now ''Munich'' can make its move.

Another example of Friedman's thinking: When ''Brokeback'' won the L.A. and N.Y. film critics' prizes for Best Picture and led the pack of nominations for the Globes and the Broadcast Film Critics, many pundits considered that a big plus for Ang Lee's film. Not Friedman. He said that by giving all those prizes to the same movie, the awards were now all ''irrelevant.''

I want to echo something Ang Lee said tonight (well, more paraphrase than echo) -- it has been a great year for movies. It took a good chunk of the year for the best ones to show up, but this has been my favorite year for quality films since 1980.

About the Golden Globes, despite the occasional chuckle (thank you Geena Davis & Steve Carrel), this was miserably dull -- spent half the show skipping back to "24", and I'm a huge BBM supporter.

And, hey Sanchez -- the Gay Globes! Hilarious. Who's writing your material? Dennis Quaid?

I loved 1999. And not just cause of the Prince song. Seemed to me a real turning point year when strange, wondrous films were slipping through.

I agree, 1999 remains my gold standard year as well. Even the mediocre studio movies were more interesting that year.

"Walk the Line cant pick up support from the guilds." Steve4992

Steve, have you heard of the PGA and SAG? Yep, old Walk the Line was nominated for a PGA award and two SAG awards for Best Actor and Best Actress - and did you know that the PGA and SAG has the largest cross over with Ampas? Far more PGA and SAG members also belong to Ampas then WGA and DGA. Not to mention, WTL was the only film that DIDNT send screeners to the PGA members but still got a nomination. And, both actors refused to go out pimping for votes - unlike their counterparts from other films. Interesting, isnt it?

Too bad WTL has no guild support - oh - and no box office.

Terence Howard was in Lackawanna Blues, which was nominated for a few Globes. It's this guy's break out year for sure. I'd love to see him nominated for actor or supporting. If not, I can settle for song (which I don't think he wrote but here's hoping he performs it at the awards).

Hepwa's 1980 is also a really good call. But was last year really all that good? Deserving of our passionate love or just a case of lowered expectations?

1999 was a great yr for film. and the best films didn't even sniff any awards.

The best race right now is for Best Actor. 3 well deserving candidates. I don't think with anyone in a clear lead yet.

Oh, I think there's a clear lead in Philip Seymour Hoffman and if Capote gets any other nominations, it's going to be based on his performance as much as for the script and directing. Like Foxx last year, Hoffman was a lock as soon as people started seeing the movie.

I didn't watch the show but I Tivo'd it. Had to put my 24 fix over an awards show.

No other category has 3 top contenders like Best Actor does. Hoffman may be in the lead but by no means is he a lock of any kind.

Mongoose:

The DGA is widely considered to be the most significant of all the guilds in predicting what will win the BP Oscar. Since 1980, only one movie has failed to win a DGA nomination and gone on to win the Oscar for BP--Driving Miss Daisy in 1989. (Born on the Fourth of July won the DGA that year.) That's pretty long odds.

The Huffman/Witherspoon battle should be just as good. Two top performances going head to head. With no one even close to them.

I go with Hoffman and Witherspoon as Best Actors this year.

I think it will be Witherspoon, Ledger, Williams and Clooney for Oscar. I reckon having Ledger and Williams win will be too good of an opportunity. Plus, it'll be like "he played gay, but we know he's got a girlfriend and a baby! He's really straight".

There were some oddities tonight. If you're at all interested you should read my blog - http://kamikazecamel.blogspot.com/

It has many a comments on presenters mispronouncing nominees names (Bronsan? Linley?), my hatred for Paul Giamatti, Phillip Seymour Hoffman being a greasy slob, and me deciding that Jamie Foxx has the biggest ego in the history of the world. Also, Geena Davis is like the 50ft woman.

Best award of the night? Sandra freakin' Oh! I wish more winners were THAT excited. Just seeing her as her nomination was read out she looks so thrilled and then when she won it was so exciting. Nobody seems to act like that anymore, especially with so many awards ceremonies - it probably gets a big blase for people like George and co. Sandra's the best, I love her so. It makes me extra glad that she won because she was right royally robbed for Sideways last year of ANYTHING outside of Ensemble prizes. She got jipped by that film. She also got a divorce out of it!

Homosexuality, Politics and Asians were quite popular this year, non?

Oh yeah, Best Speech - Geena Davis. Funny lady. Then Steve Carell, Sandra Oh, Felicity Huffman and Hugh Laurie.

Worst. WORST OF WORSTS - Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Decorum is appreciated, man.

For me the best acting of the year was Terry Howard in Hustle and Flow. A genuine showing. Not an imitation of someone famous. Going to lead to big things for him.

Jamie Foxx is allowed to have an ego. He has an Oscar to his credit. It should have softened after Stealth though.

What did PS Hoffman do??? I didn't catch it.

Walk the Line is going to roll into the Academy Awards as the highest grossing pic that can challenge. That means something. How much I don't know. You have to like the chances of the two lead actors being able to walk home with trophy's.

"Winners for "Brokeback Mountain" said nothing about the struggles of gay people or that Philip Seymour Hoffman omitted even the mere mention of Truman Capote, the character he portrayed."

Really?? This cannot make the BBM factions very happy today. Not even a mention????

After seeing "Capote", I find it really hard to believe that Clifton Collins isn't racking up the Best Supp Awards. He was fantastic. Especially since Hoffman seems to be a front runner. The Best Supp category is the weakest it has been in quite some time.

Josh, "Brokeback Mountain" isn't even ABOUT the struggles for gay people, it's about the consequences of living a lie for fear of death and the heavy weight of loneliness and regret.

If you want to learn more about the struggles for gay people (and were expecting some kind of lesson during an awards show), do your own research, you won't have trouble finding it. Believe me the "BBM factions" are very, very happy today (except for Heath Ledger's chances at Best Actor, which I think are, effectively, over).

Is Walk the Line this year's Driving Miss Daisy (which is the only film in past thirty years to win the BP Oscar after another movie--Born on the Fourth of July--won GGs for BP Drama, director and screenplay)? I seriously doubt it for two reasons. First, Ang Lee is well liked and respected in Hollywood, and he's never won an Oscar before. Second, the Academy voters will want to maintain their credentials as members in good standing of the liberal establishment. And, with BBM having won virtually all of the precursor awards, it will really make AMPAS look like a bunch of homophobes if they give the BP award to another movie. BBM is a lock at this point.

I agree with Terence that best actor is looking to be the race to watch. PS Hoffman is in the lead but Ledger and BBM have the momentum. Is it just me or did PS Hoffman come across as a totally unlikable in person.

The makers of BBM are probably conscious of not wanting to further politicize the film and have avoided thanking the gay community specifically on the award shows. It would be nice but not necessary.

walk the line would need some added momentum to win best pic. will be tough to do.

No movie is a lock to win Best Pic or any actor to win Oscar because they won a Golden Globe. Relax with the lock talk. Was The Aviator a lock last year???

Everyone keeps flogging the Aviator as an example of why BBM will not win. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, while the Aviator did win the GG for BP drama, it DID NOT WIN for director (which went to Clint Eastwood) or script (which went to Sideways). BBM won all three of those awards last night.

If one is trying to predict what will win (rather than what should win, which is simply a matter of opinion), then the GGs and the other awards are certainly relevant to the discussion. While none of the precursors is entirely accurate, they do provide useful information. And in the last thirty years, with the exception of Born on the Fourth of July, no movie has dominated the pre-Oscar awards like Brokeback and failed to win the BP Oscar. End of story.

I didn't think ''The Aviator'' was a lock last year. It won Best Drama, but lost Best Director to Clint Eastwood, and ''Million Dollar Baby'' was coming on fast. Of course, winning a Golden Globe is no guarantee of anything; last year's Globe winners for Supporting Actor and Actress (Clive Owen and Natalie Portman) lost at the Oscars. But it's still better to have won than to have lost. ''Brokeback'' can crow about winning 4 Globes now, but if it had been skunked, imagine how quickly everyone would be writing it off.

BM is certainly more of a lock than Aviator if not a complete lock. As a film, BM is small, intimate, modest...all the things Aviator was not. Additionally, BM is still building at the box office while Aviator came out wide too soon (a bit like Munich I'm afraid).

And if the GG revealed anything, Walk the Line certainly looks better than it has before.

I think most pundits picked ''Walk the Line'' to clean up for Best Comedy/Musical, and Actor and Actress there. But it does come off stronger than the many movies that went in with nominations and left emptyhanded: ''Good Night & Good Luck,'' ''Match Point'' and ''The Producers'' (all 0 for 4); ''Mrs. Henderson Presents'' and ''Squid and the Whale'' (0 for 3), and ''Cinderella Man,'' ''Crash,'' ''A History of Violence,'' ''King Kong,'' ''Munich'' (0 for 2).

One other statistical tidbit. I looked to see whether, in the last thirty years, there was a movie that received no GGs of any kind, but went on to win the BP Oscar. I belive that only film that pulled this off is Chariots of Fire in 1981.

No one is saying BBM won't win. I just wouldn't call it a "lock". Favorite? Yeah. Unless you're just into hyperbole.

You know who was a lock this weekend? The Colts.

The Golden Globes is an indicator but it is not THE indicator of anything. They may want to be. But they're not. No one remembers who won a Globe six hours after the show.

The Globes mean nothing and the race is still wide open, yada, yada, yada . . . . Sounds like Roger Friedman's column today.

Here's the one I can't figure out: What happened to Renee Zellweger? If the Broadcast Critics, the SAGs and the Golden Globes all nominated Russell Crowe and Paul Giamatti for ''Cinderella Man,'' why not Renee? I seem to even recall her getting better notices in some reviews. And as we know, Best Actress isn't the toughest category. Renee's a three-time Globe winner and three-time Oscar nominee. It'll be interesting to see if she makes the Best Actress cut at the Academy Awards.

It is an incredibly weak category, but she would have to do some campaigning if she wants to get past Judi Dench or Scarlett Johansson or anyone whose movie has come out more recently.

The Globes neither indicate everything nor nothing. When the guilds come around, the GGs will fade, but they are a stepping stone to build the Oscar campaign. Whoever lost the battle can still win the war. But to the victor also goes the spoils.

Sorry to get so philosophical but I just don't think it's either all or nothing.

Renee never had any traction off Cinderella Man. That movie was always about the two boys. They might throw Paul G a bone after last years snub.

The guilds mean a lot more. Which is how it should be.

Giamatti deserves it, even just to get nominated would be a big "thank you for your work over the years." Renee's got hers and Crowe too. The film is so dead, but Uni and Ron (or someone) won't let it go quietly.

I agree that Giamatti will probably get nominated, but it looks like the Academy will wait for his next great performance for the win. That film really is dead.

You mean Lady in the Water? Could continue the grand tradition of giving awards to people after snubbing them for something they really deserved.

I think Scarlett Johanson's being pushed for Supporting Actress, not Best Actress. I'm kinda surprised she didn't win last night; it was her 4th Golden Globe nomination, and she's never won. Oddly, too, she didn't make the SAG list either.

I also thought that Maria Bello at a shot at Supporting Actress, but the Globes put her in Best Actress, and she failed to get a SAG nom.

Both Supporting Actress and Supporting Actor categories still seem pretty open. To me, there's no overwhelming Oscar favorite in either case.

I will never really understand how some people end up in supporting categories for roles that are really lead roles... and vice versa, for that matter.

It's fun hearing everyone's opinions on the show. I had to watch 24, though I did see Eric Bana present right before I started, which made me happy :)

I'd be loving 24 even more if I weren't so sad about... (considering non-existent spoiler precautions for this board)... um, what happened to you know who and you know who else in the first 15 minutes. *sniff*

Well, Weisz(sp?) and Johanson stand a much better shot at copping the Award in the supporting categories. But I thought Johanson would win for Lost in Translation too. Seems like a lot of leading females are putting themselves into the Supporting category. Bello too. Could be a really competitive category when it comes to Oscar night since all three were really good in what, to me, were leading roles.

How great was that opening 4 hours to the new season of 24? If you haven't seen it yet, you should really catch it. A great show. Exciting. Fast paced. Fabulous storytelling and a perfect star turn by Kiefer Sutherland. Reminds you how much talent they have in that family.

I would love it if Bello could pull out a win. Since Reese almost certainly has lead actress locked up, supporting actress may well be the most interesting category this year, which is a rare thing to happen.

Lynn, I'm with you. I guess amount of screen time and celebrity play a big part. Maria Bello, Rachel Weisz and Michelle Williams are literally the leading ladies of their respective films, but their roles as wives are primarily to support their husbands; plus, they're not given tons of screen time. You could put them in Best Actress, but is it really fair for them to compete with, say, Ziyi Zhang or Felicity Huffman, whose films really revolve around the female as the principal? That's why actresses (especially lesser-known ones) are happy to go into the Supporting race. Who wants to compete with Oscar winners like Dame Judi Dench or Charlize Theron?

More questionable to me are cases like George Clooney in ''Syriana''; initially, I believe he made it known that he'd be competing for Best Actor. Later, he changed his mind. Now he's in Supporting, but who's he supporting? Yes, it's a movie with a lot of characters, but if there's a principal guy we follow, it's him. Clooney plays the guy whose book the movie is based on. Ultimately, studios & stars position themselves where they feel they have the best shot to win.

IMO, it's difficult in true ensemble movies where it's really arguable if there really is one or two leading roles, of either gender. Is it possible to have a movie with no leading character?

Woody Allen means death at the Box Office. But he means gold for Supporting Actresses.

Who's the lead in Magnolia? No one. In Nashville or Short Cuts? No one. Traffic? Clooney may be the one people "follow" but is that because he's white? The film is just as much about Jeffrey Wright's character as Clooney's. And I wouldn't be surprised to find that Matt Damon had more screen time than Clooney as well.

Who could follow anything in Syriana anyway? Just so much blubber and fluff and incoherence.

I think you have to go with not just screen time but also impact on the film. Some had a problem with Daniel Day Lewis as actor for Gangs of New York. True, he wasn't the main character, but his performance is so great and central to that film it made it lead. Some thing with Kidman in The Hours. Clooney in Syriana is barely lead if at all. Screen time will probably prove he isn't in it that much, even when compared with Damon or Wright. He certainly doesn't carry the film though his star power was pivotal in selling it.

The thing about lead is who/what character impacts the story most.

Like Don Corleone in Godfather. Or Peter Finch's character Howard Beale in Network. Not long for screen time. But they were the stories driving characters. Hence lead roles.

Don Corleone I agree totally absolutely.

In Network however, I definitely see William Holden as lead. It's his story, his loves, his loss, his eyes that we see the story through and sympathize with. Howard Beale is an example of a strong supporting role.

Network was a classic. Holden was a lead but I think so was Finch. Finch is the catalyst for everything that happens. But I think I would have voted for Holden if they actually gave me a vote.

You won't find many actresses better than Faye Dunaway. She owned that tim period. That movie had a lot going for it.

Unfortunately, Beale was not as 3 dimensional for me. You didn't meet his family or learn as much about his history or follow his love life, and he had gone off kilter so it was hard to really connect to him emotionally. Holden anchors it, and besides, Holden is pretty much the man in any movie he's in.

But it is interesting to connect Network and Syriana, two movies that reference wealthy Saudis 30 years apart.

Yeah, another perfect example of that is Anthony Hopkins for "Silence of the Lambs".He steals the show, hell HE IS the show. But he's not the co-lead with Jodie. He's on screen for less than 30 minutes or so. But his character is so crucial to the story he gets put in as lead.

or Fargo, is Frances McDormand really the lead? She shows up in Act Two. Isn't she really supporting William H. Macy's story? isn't he the real lead?

I think if Del Toro had gotten the best Actor Nod instead of Supporting he still would have won. Just great work.

Hopkins is a great example of making the most of your screen time and being a lead. Even in a few scenes. That movie couldn't exist without him and he's in a 7'10 cell for most of his scenes. Really extraordinary acting.

Oh yeah, and Training Day is the other one. How exactly is Ethan Hawke the supporting role to Denzel? he's not. He's just the actor supporting the star, and that's how it works.

Absolutely, Hannibal's intro scene I think will stand out as one of the best scene's in cinema history.

You can make a case that Washington's character is the lead though in "Training Day". Actually, they're both leads there. It's a two man movie. But for Oscar considerations it's better if Hawke is the supporter. And the star is given star billing. But Hawke is the one with a legit arc.

Peter Finch deserved his Oscar. Howard Beal is a classic character. Him shouting is priceless.

Didn't Judi Dench win an Oscar for one scene of screen time? I think it was 'Elizabeth'. Maybe William Hurt can do that in the Best Supporting Actor group this year. You have to be some lead to win it with as few scenes as Hopkins.

It's true, for supporting all you really need is one really good scene with maybe one or two other expositionary ones.

Denzel gives what they call a "star turn" in that movie. The movie is on his shoulders even though it is Ethans story. They were lucky to find someone just as good as Denzel.

Denzel was badass. Haven't seen that from him since. Hopefully he is just as good in Spike's nex movie. Jodie FOster and Clive Owen in it too. Good trailer for it too.

Traffic is an interesting case. You legitimately have three A stories going on. Each a lead in his own story. On the whole, any of them could be the lead. You can say Del Toro is the key and central figure to the whole thing. And is a lead.

Benicio Del Toro has a well earned Oscar for Traffic. Tell Stevie Gaghan that's how you tell an interwining story involving a large cast and a large story. Shows how good Soderbergh is.

The question of lead or supporting is a fascinating one. As Hopscotch points out, Anthony Hopkins' screen time isn't very much, and he's really a supporting character, but his presence dominates that movie. He won the Oscar for Best Actor, but the National Board of Review honored him earlier that season for Supporting Actor.

A few years ago, the Wall Street Journal did a fascinating story about this, too. They clocked ''Training Day'' and discovered that Ethan Hawke had far more screen time than Denzel Washington, but Hawke wound up as Supporting. Also, Jim Broadbent had far more screen time than Judi Dench, but Dench was Best Actress, while Broadbent was categorized as Supporting Actor.

Speaking of Dench, her Oscar-winning turn was in ''Shakespeare in Love,'' and I think she had something like 3 scenes. I've read in some places that that's the shortest Oscar-winning performance, but I really think it's Beatrice Straight in ''Network,'' who has only one confrontation scene with William Holden.

Benecio Del Toro's an interesting case, too. The SAG Awards put him in Lead Actor, and he won ... over Russell Crowe in ''Gladiator.'' At the Oscars, as you probably know, however, Del Toro won for Supporting and Crowe for Best Actor.

Finally, there's William Hurt. When he won both the L.A. and N.Y. film critics' awards for Supporting Actor for ''A History of Violence,'' it looked like he'd be a shoo-in for an Oscar slot. But since then, Hurt's been almost invisible. No Broadcast Film Critics nom, no Golden Globe nom, no SAG Award nom. That's not to say he still couldn't pull out one at the Oscars, but it isn't as likely as it once was.

Screen time doesn't neccesarily mean lead or supporting. It matters on who the actor is, the character, and the movie itself. What importance is said character to the story? Hopkins was the key figure in Silence. Foster was too but it was his leading that spurred her on.

I don't see any buzz around Hurt right now. It's too bad too.

Network had so many good performances its hard to single even one out.

All this talk seems to point to how arbitrary it is...though it is definitely meaningful. Clooney's performance in Syriana is no where near Ledger, Phoenix, Howard, or Hoffmann in terms of carrying the entire film. While Dench in Shakespeare, Brando in Godfather, Hopkins in Lambs and Lewis in Gangs weren't necessarily in their films as much as other leading people, their presence could be felt throughout it. In other words, they were indispensable.

''Network'' was such a great film, and what a brilliant script by Paddy Chayefsky. And what he satirized back in 1976 has pretty much come true. Didja know that CBS and George Clooney are planning to remake it as a live TV version next fall? That oughta be interesting.

Obviously a guy like Hoffman or Phoenix has to do a little more heavy lifting since they're bio pics. But sometimes a role like Del Toro's is even tougher because you have to hold so many threads together.

A PS: I love the way they shoot the Mexico scenes in "Traffic". A good look.

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!

A tv remake I hope they pass on making. You don't mess with perfection.

Chayefsky is one of the best writers ever. A real talent.

I liked Ned Beatty's scene in Network.

"Is it just me or did PS Hoffman come across as a totally unlikable in person."

THANK YOU! He also came off as a slob. Does the Academy want him to be the face of this year's Oscars alongside Reese? I think they'd much rather have Heath, Reese, George and Michelle. Can they resist a Heath and Michelle opportunity? But Supporting Actress is really contentious. There are 9 ladies who are legit contenders and there are only 2 that seem certain for nods - Williams and Weisz. Arguments could be made for Adams, Bello, Johansson, Keener, Li, MacLaine and McDormand.

"I looked to see whether, in the last thirty years, there was a movie that received no GGs of any kind, but went on to win the BP Oscar. I belive that only film that pulled this off is Chariots of Fire in 1981."

Chariots of Fire was deemed a foreign film and thus couldn't compete anywhere apart from that category (which I believe it won). But the Globes changed that rule and now it's foreign language.

I think on the matter of Lead/Supporting Rufus got it right a few posts up.

However, every time SAG nominates someone in the different category (Jennifer Connolly, Benicio del Toro) it was because of an error. SAGs can only vote in a designated category. Which is why Meryl was snubbed in 2002 she was placed in supporting for both of her films and split her vote. However the only person I can think of that was nominated for Supporting by SAG and then nominated for Lead by AMPAS was Keisha Castle-Hughes. It seems to work the other way around, but not that way.

Dench had 8 minutes of screen-time, btw. Several scenes, but it only accounted to 8 minutes. Still - she was outright excellent in it, so I can't really complain.

I hope they don't vote based on likes and dislikes of how someone looks or acts or gives a speech.
I hope they vote on quality of work. Yes, you can call me naive.

Dench winning was also partial recompense for her not winning for Mrs. Brown a year or two earlier.
If Matt Damon and Ben Affleck can win Best Screenplay, the groundwork has been set for Michelle Williams and Heath Ledger both winning this year. Their publicity people have plenty to work with - they even have a baby! Old people (i.e. Academy voters) love babies.

I didn't think Williams was as good as Rachel Weisz but Weisz was more of the star role and probably should be the leading actress.

Chariots of Fire. There's a movie I haven't seen in a long time.

Never liked Chariots.

Kamikaze:

I posted the incorrect info about Chariots of Fire. You are right; it won the GG for Best Foreign Film; that info wasn't in the database that I looked at. Thanks for catching the error.

The GG's dont have that foreign film category anymore, right?

The Golden Globes still have a foreign film category, and the Palestinian entry, ''Paradise Now,'' just won it last night.

In 1981, ''Chariots of Fire'' was considered a Foreign Film from the United Kingdom. And its competition was really something: ''Atlantic City'' (Canada, France - huh?), ''Das Boot'' (West Germany), ''Gallipoli'' (Australia) and ''Pixote'' (Brazil).

I'm assuming the parameters must've changed or else ''Mrs. Henderson Presents'' and ''Pride & Prejudice'' would be Foreign Films, too.

1981 was also the notorious year of the New Star of the Year award, which went to Pia Zadora, who beat out Elizabeth McGovern, Howard Rollins Jr., Kathleen Turner, Rachel Ward and Craig Wasson (that's a name I haven't seen in awhile).

Who was Howard Rollins Jr.?
I would have voted for Kathleen Turner, which I'm assuming would have been for Body Heat.

Howard Rollins Jr. was a gifted actor who got a Golden Globe and an Oscar nomination for playing Coalhouse Walker in the 1981 movie of ''Ragtime.'' He later starred in the TV series of ''In the Heat of the Night.'' He was diagnosed in 1996 with lymphoma and died shortly after.

Oh, the man who would be Yaphet Kotto if there had not already been one.

What's with all the negative, homophobic posts from, what I would believe to be, an open-minded group? Aren't real movie lovers more accepting of the real world around them? Hasn't the world of cinema opened your minds and hearts? A couple of you folks ought to be ashamed of your comments. No awards for you!

Wasson. Body Double Craig Wasson. A shame he lost.

1981 was the year a lot of people lost any respect for the globes when pia zadora won that award. still hasn't regained credibility in some circles for that.

If Giamatti wins for Cinderella Man I have to think it's like the case of Pacino winning for Scent of a Woman. A nice payback. And really for other things he has done in the past. A nice body of work award. I just can't see them going to anyone else right now. The field is so weak. Maybe Dillon sneaks in for Crash. Maybe Clooney's star power takes over. But I have to lean towards Paul G right now.

Phillip S Hoffman's whole thing is being frumpy and schlumpy and anything that rhymes with umpy. He's not a leading man. It wouldn't be him if he started grooming.

I hope voters don't vote for people they'd like to give a speech and look good on a podium. Can we say Shallow?

''Oh, the man who would be Yaphet Kotto ...''

Jeffmcm, why the cheap shot at Rollins (and Kotto)? You don't even know Rollins' work. He got a lotta raves (not to mention the Globe & Oscar nominations). It's unseemly and disrespectful to lump two very different actors like that together (just because they're both black?).

I read in the NY Daily News today that people may vote for Terrence Howard in both the lead and supporting categories. To also make sure he wins Supporting to reward him for a good year and his talent.

I've learned to brush off the racist things I hear. Been hearing stuff like "They look alike" since I was a boy. Doesn't mean it doesn't hurt but I've learned to just shrug at ignorance. But if you don't know who Rollins is you should really get that Netflix card out and educate yourself with "Ragtime", "A Soldiers Story" and grab "In the Heat of the Night" the tv show. While you're at it you may as well check out Yaphet Kotto. Another great character actor. Been seen in such classics as "Midnight Run", Alien", and "Live and Let Die". Also the good tv series "Homicide". Playing the leader of the squad. They're two separate men and two very good actors.

Carol O'Connor is very fun to watch on screen. "In the Heat of the Night" is a highly underrated drama and a good update/remake off a good movie. Rollins even does Sidney Potier proud.

"Denzel was badass. Haven't seen that from him since. Hopefully he is just as good in Spike's nex movie. Jodie FOster and Clive Owen in it too. Good trailer for it too."

I was really surprised by this trailer -- not the movie, which looks cool, but very much like a typical Hollywood thriller -- but to see that Spike Lee is directing it. It seems like very... I dunno, just not like a Spike Lee movie somehow.

I also really hope that after this, Clive Owen does not end up being the latest really good British actor forever cast as a bad guy in American movies. Ditto for Paul Bettany after the Harrison Ford movie and DaVinci Code. They both deserve better. I'm glad Sean Bean still works in the UK occasionally so I can see him play the good guy for a change.

Hollywood loves casting Brit thespians as Euro Baddies. Must be the accents. Sean Bean is the bad guy in every movie he's in lately. He's got the market covered.

It's a joke. Were they not both in different versions of In the Heat of the Night? Did/do they not have similarly beefy builds? Race has nothing to do with it.

Sidney Poitier played Virgil Tibbs in the 1967 feature film of ''In the Heat of the Night.'' Howard Rollins Jr. played Virgil Tibbs in the 1998-1994 TV series of ''In the Heat of the Night.'' Yaphet Kotto had nothing to do with either the movie or the TV series. Rollins was cast as a leading man; Kotto is known as a character actor. Kotto is beefy; Rollins was not. But both were African-American. Some ''joke.''

Well obviously I was misinformed.
Anyway, I don't see the problem. You wouldn't get mad at me if I had a fuzzy memory and mistook Carroll O'Connor with Rod Steiger, would you? To merely comment on a very vague physical resemblance does not imply hostility or ill-will.

Jeffmcm, if you had merely mistaken Carroll O'Connor with Rod Steiger, that would've been understandable since one did the TV series and the other the movie. But that's not the case here. You mistook the actor who did the TV series with someone who had nothing to do with the TV series or the movie. Yes, anyone can make a mistake. But a simple Google of their images would've shown you otherwise. But I guess what's disappointing to me is why you felt compelled to take a cheapshot at a respected, dead actor and refer to Rollins as ''oh, the man who would be Yaphet Kotto.'' You might take LesterFreed's advice someday and check out Rollins' work.

I hope you can understand the confusion, since Yaphet Kotto was in "Homicide" at approximately the same time. I didn't just pull his name out of thin air.

I'm sure Rollins was great.

WOW. What a racist. I didn't expect that.

Care to elaborate?

All black people look alike? Yeah. Sorry. I take that personal being an African American.

Whatever. I can't take racist jerks.

Uh huh. It took you about a full 24 hours to decide to be offended. Not buying it.

We all look alike? I didn't want to say anything but that is beyond low. If I saw you in person right now I'd bash your head in. I can't take racist shit. We all look the same? Get out of here you jerk.

Rufus. I'm not taking your heated declarations seriously. If you were going to get all offended, you had all day. I don't believe you. Frankly, I don't even think you exist.

I apologize to Wayman for the misunderstanding.
But not to Rufus.

HOW WEIRD that when I suggested that Rufus might be a phony multiple-posting name, he disappeared.

Anyone that knows a little about film knows that Rollins and Kotto look nothing alike except for the fact that they're African American. It's a terrible joke done in really poor taste.

I found a link to a picture of Rollins. Come on, he looks _exactly_ like Yaphet Kotto!

http://www.assessment.gatech.edu/SACS/QEP/bios/rollins.php

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)