THE HFPA PROMISES TO BE BIASED AGAINST RICKY GERVAIS

This decision makes me question the credibility of the Golden Globes.

Really a shocking statement IMHO. I couldn't believe they said that outloud. So, if Gervais made the best comedy in a given year, you wouldn't give him the Award for it because you didn't like how he hosted your awards show?

Well fuck you very much, you just admitted in front of the whole world that your awards are a joke and are about back patting and star fucking, not recognizing and rewarding talent

Seriously, just  a mind bending statement

Credibility?  Its an awards show.  Even worse it's a shitty awards show.  They pick popular material, not good material.  Anyway, I never understood why people watch this or any of those lame awards shows.  I mean I understand the sort of people who read celebrity mags and that kinda bs, enjoying this nonsense.

This decision makes me question the credibility of the Golden Globes.

wow, and here I thought that putting those two terms together would cause a universal paradox.....

anyway, what a bunch of butthurt weenies. I did like how Ricky made a particularly great joke (which got groans) and he leans back and says 'Well, I warned em'

This situation illustrates exactly why humour directed at conservative, insular and self-reverential institutions is often so successful: Because said institutions can’t help but jump up and down in OTT outrage, thus making the joke even funnier than it was when it was first told.

Reminds me of the incident 50 years ago when the HFPA were horrified when host Henny Youngman brazenly offered up his wife to the audience as if she were property.

grr double post

He can still win Golden Globes vicariously through Steve Carell

Any guesses as to the lamest possible replacements they can book for next year?

Ryan Seacrest has it locked.

If this year's Oscars hosts are a hit, they will absolutely hire an actor for the GG's next year.  This is based on my assumption that Hathaway and Franco will be about as kid-gloves as it gets.

So, the thing is, the whole point of the Globes is to suck movie stars off, and that's never really been in question. Gervais pissed off the thin-skinned stars, so he's clearly not fulfilling the goals of the organization, and this should come as no surprise. But then I remembered how they marketed it:

So yeah, what a bunch of hypocrite asshats.

I'd like to think that Gervais is off where ever he wants to be, sipping a frosty glass of beer and cackling.

I'd also like to think that the HFPA are just itching to take back the Globe they gave him for The Office.  Hahahahah

It's one thing to know the Globes are a joke. It's another and altogether much more hilarious thing to have the HFPA come out and say so themselves, in quite clear terms.

Its bullshit pure and simple but the Globes always were. I find it hard to believe they gave him that gig two years in a row. The real story is huge gasp the audience gave the scientology quip and weirdest of all Downey Jr having thin skin of all people.

Just because RDJ is so awesome, I didn't really think that he was showcasing thin skin.  More like he was playing off of what Gervais set up.  I dunno... maybe my ability to read a person took a day off.  But IF he was displaying some thin skin, I certainly can't begrudge him for being a little sensitive about a dark period in his life.  

Roman Polanski won a Golden Globe two years after his sexual assault case.

Nick's last statement tells you all you need to know about this story and the globes.

It seems neither Ricky nor myself got the memo that everyone loves Tom Cruise again and no one talks shit about him anymore.  WTF was THAT reaction?!  Jesus, you'd think he injected a baby with AIDS onstage when he said that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 

It's one thing to know the Globes are a joke. It's another and altogether much more hilarious thing to have the HFPA come out and say so themselves, in quite clear terms.

Especially when RG cracks a joke about them being biased and corrupt, and they respond by saying "HE'S A BIG MEANIE AND WE HATE HIM AND AND WE'LL NEVER NOMINATE HIM AGAIN!!"

Um, you do know you're actually proving his point... Right?

Ahem... Guess who just figured out the multi-quote function a tad too late? Apologies folks, permit me a noob's double-post...
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

Just because RDJ is so awesome, I didn't really think that he was showcasing thin skin.  More like he was playing off of what Gervais set up.  I dunno... maybe my ability to read a person took a day off.  But IF he was displaying some thin skin, I certainly can't begrudge him for being a little sensitive about a dark period in his life.  

Yeah, in a way I can see that. I just figured him to be the kind of guy to see how Gervais was spreading the shots around and figure where he was coming from. Or he could've been playing off of it all, and it's my reading abilities that are screwy. During that dark period, I'm sure he saw more than his fair share of the fucked-up end of the celeb game. But that's  just me speculating.

Downey politely stated he wasn't too happy with Gervais' nastiness to a UK reporter backstage. I don't think he was OTT offended though.

NZ - the gay Scientology gag was primarily aimed at Travolta, given that Gervais commented to a British paper that he hoped the joke "didn't get him thrown off the private jet".

Buncha whiny pussies you yanks are.

Not to rain on the awesomely stupid celebration parade (because man, that is some choice awesomely stupid), but I would be surprised if this doesn't get retracted, either via an apology or by blaming it on some element of the HFPA that doesn't represent the group as a whole. Someone over there has got to realize just how bad that statement makes them look.

Yeah the tone of the article is slanted as hell and all of those quotes came from an anonymous source, I'd be wary of treating them as anything approaching official statements.

From the man himself: 

http://www.rickygervais.com/thissideofthetruth.php

I also considered that RDJ was simply playing along with what Ricky Gervais had set up. Out of all the people to be offended, I would have rated him rather low on the list. Yes, it was about his rehabilitation, but RDJ strikes me as someone who could show good humor even over that. Thankfully, many of the guests responded to Gervais favorably. In particular, Bale, De Niro and Pacino either did not mind or really dug the act.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

Any guesses as to the lamest possible replacements they can book for next year?

Quote:

Originally Posted by horrid 

He can still win Golden Globes vicariously through Steve Carell

This would be the best way to come out of the whole situation on their end if this is all true.  Egg on their face and all that and say they have a sense of humour.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alobek 

 

From the man himself: 

Quote:

I enjoyed the Globes more this year. I think I had better gags. More along the lines of the Mel Gibson one last year. 

 

Obviously the rumour that the organizers stopped me going out on stage for an hour is rubbish. I did every link I was scheduled to do. The reason why the gaps were uneven is because when I got the rundown I was allowed to choose who I presented to. I obviously chose the spots that I had the best gags for. They couldn't move around the order but I could move around however I wanted. 

 

All the same conspiracy theories as last year too... "So and so was offended"... "hasn't been invited back yet"... exactly the same as last time. "Paul McCartney was furious"... no he wasn't. And nor was Tim Allen and Tom Hanks. I was drinking with them after. 

 

Why do people have to embellish? They're allowed to say they hated it. They're allowed to say they didn't find it funny, that it was tasteless, over the top, or whatever. But why do they speculate and make stuff up? 

 

Don't worry, I know the answer. Because it's more interesting than "it went fine and some people won some awards and then went to a party". But that's all that happened.

 

Actually, I see what they mean. Boring. So here's what really happened. Bruce Willis and Sly Stallone started a fight with me but Alec Baldwin and Mark Walberg stepped in and helped me out. That's what happened.

http://www.rickygervais.com/thissideofthetruth.php

 

Boooooo!  BOOOOOOO!  Boring!

Gervais was definitely the best part of the show...and it doesnt surprise me that the HFPA is pissed at him. They take themselves entirely too seriously. He made what would have been a very boring awards show entertaining.

Man, a lot of Ricky's gags were hilarious.  " And the other one is Tim Allen."  God, that was hilarious.

And RDJ was fucking awful.  His gag was retarded.   

Eh I think the thing with Gervais is, he projects meanness. Steve Martin, Alec Baldwin etc could have read those same jokes and you wouldn't get the sense they meant them in a vicious way (even though the jokes themselves are vicious). I've wondered why he didn't resonate with me, when I usually love that kind of humor. Oh and if he's so "edgy' why are all his movies the most generic lowest common denominator pap?

Still, all this controversy throws the validity of the Golden Globes into doubt