Entertainment
With a flailing Jo Koy at the helm, the Golden Globes' party seriously fizzled
The Golden Globes, the phoniest of the (almost) major screen awards, having briefly died on the operating table, was shocked back to life Sunday, its resurrection made available to the interested public over new home CBS and its streaming sister, Paramount+.
As detailed, if not instigated, by this paper, the Globes’ former administrators, the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn., finally dissolved in a flurry of bad publicity over an extreme lack of diversity among its relatively minuscule, dubiously credentialed, infamously persuadable, financially fiddly, disproportionately demanding membership. The brand is now co-owned by a billionaire and a media company among whose properties are the trade magazines Variety and the Hollywood Reporter, which not incidentally benefit from awards-related advertising. (Make of that what you will.) Still, with some fresh institutional oversight and an expanded, scrupulously diverse voting body, the new Globes are arguably less phony than of yore — which is good, but also, as an awards show, beside the point.
As television, the Globes’ reputation rests almost entirely on being more fun than the Oscars or the Emmys, whose combined territory the Globes encompass — an alcohol-fueled Hollywood party that might produce something wild, and which recalls the days when all such ceremonies were private banquets, before they turned into TV shows held in theaters with celebrities nailed in their seats for three hours, facing forward. (Indeed, some Globes guests are seated with their backs to the stage.)
So here we were, Sunday night, back at the Beverly Hilton hotel, on an elegant set, emphasizing gold, with table-filled terraces leading down to a circular stage. It was, if nothing else, nicely shot, emphasizing intimacy rather than grandness. The evening was genuinely star-studded — nearly all the nominees were present — and to the extent one enjoys watching celebrities in a room react, or not, to jokes at their expense, or tributes from their colleagues, one might account the broadcast a success.
Apart from that, the broadcast was watchable, like a handsome screen saver, without being interesting in any of the ways the announcer or producers promised. The absence of production numbers, tribute segments and self-congratulatory montages, while in some ways a good thing — it’s the only way to get through a show with so many categories in three hours — means that the evening has a structural repetitive sameness that depends entirely on the unpredictable human element to elevate it or subvert it.
There was a fair share of elevation; it’s nice to see people recognized, and most everyone who was seemed sincerely touched, though the countdown clock, which more than one recipient mentioned aloud, kept most to a litany of thanks to colleagues and families, and away from extracurricular speechifying. But there was very little subversion. Robert Downey Jr., winning a supporting actor prize for “Oppenheimer,” tried to get that party started — “I took a beta blocker, so this is going to be a breeze” — but no one joined him in the conga line. In a contrasting human moment, presenter Kevin Costner seemed up past his bedtime, and barely interested in holding up his end of the banter opposite America Ferrera. Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig, who I’m guessing prepared their own material, were funny as music continually interrupted their presentation and forced them to dance. But by then we were very late in the broadcast.
Kristen Wiig and Will Ferrell dance onstage at the Golden Globe Awards.
(Sonja Flemming / CBS)
Cutaways in and out of commercials featured shots of famous people mingling, away from their tables, with a decided emphasis on shots of Bruce Springsteen; next year they might consider cutting the awards and just showing the mingling.
Selected to host, at the eleventh hour, was Jo Koy, a highly successful comedian who’s used to performing in big rooms to thousands of fans, largely about Filipino culture, but here seemed out of proportion, out of his depth and a fish out of water. His opening monologue seemed to consist mostly of high-volume pronouncements of famous people’s names, not followed necessarily by a joke.
“I got the gig 10 days ago,” he said defensively, never a good tack for a comic. “You want a perfect monologue?” He threw the show’s writers under the bus (“I wrote some of these and they’re the ones you’re laughing at”), which only compounded the sense that he was flailing; I feared at times the flop sweat might short out my television. Taylor Swift’s stone-faced reaction to a joke about the difference between an NFL broadcast and the Golden Globes — the punchline was that there were fewer shots of her on the Globes — is a meme by the time you read this. He could be surprisingly crude too. A prosthetic penis joke led from “Saltburn” to “Barbie” to “Maestro,” and the lesson he took away from “Succession” was “If you’re a billionaire, pull out.” Still, he soldiered on, and did not let his energy flag on his occasional, brief returns to the stage. And he did get Meryl Streep to say “Wakanda forever.”
Whatever its deficiencies as three hours of television, there is still something to be said for watching talented people honored, so this year’s Golden Globes, like any year’s, was not bereft of satisfying moments. For whatever reasons, institutional or otherwise, it was a diverse group of winners, so much so that it made diversity seem so normal and inevitable that it was almost not worth mentioning.
And there are other benefits to the Hollywood ecosystem, to be sure. Sunday night gave actors who have cooled their heels over much of 2023, awaiting the end of their strike, something to dress up for, a chance to step in front of a camera with a minimum of preparation and a maximum of exposure. After all, people do like getting awards, whatever the source. Plus, for the presenters and winners, there was a swag bag worth half a million dollars. And it is a fact of life that one is never too big to turn one’s nose up at free food and drink and $500,000 gift bags.
Movie Reviews
Movie Review: Paul Feig’s ‘The Housemaid’ is a twisty horror-thriller with nudity and empowerment – Sentinel Colorado
Santa left us a present this holiday season and it is exactly what we didn’t know we needed: A twisty, psychological horror-thriller with nudity that’s all wrapped up in an empowerment message.
“The Housemaid” is Paul Feig’s delicious, satirical look at the secret depravity of the ultra-rich, but it’s so well constructed that’s it’s not clear who’s naughty or nice. Halfway through, the movie zigs and everything you expected zags.
It’s almost impossible to thread the line between self-winking campy — “That’s a lot of bacon. Are you trying to kill us?” — and carving someone’s stomach with a broken piece of fine china, yet Feig and screenwriter Rebecca Sonnenshine do.
Sydney Sweeney stars as a down-on-her luck Millie Calloway, a gal with a troubled past living out of her car who answers an ad for a live-in housekeeper in a tony suburb of New York City. Her resume is fraudulent, as are her references.
Somehow, the madam of the mansion, Nina Winchester played with frosty excellence by Amanda Seyfried in pearls and creamy knits, takes a shine to this young soul. “I have a really good feeling about this, Millie,” she says in that perky, slightly crazed clipped way that Seyfried always slays with. “This is going to be fun, Millie.”
Maybe not for Millie, but definitely for us. The young housekeeper gets her own room in the attic — weird that it closes with a deadbolt from the outside, but no matter — and we’re off. Mille gets a smartphone with the family’s credit card preloaded and a key for that deadbolt. “What kind of monsters are we?” asks Nina. Indeed.
The next day, the house is a mess when the housekeeper comes down and Seyfried is in a wide-eyed, crashing-plates, full-on psychotic rage. The sweet, supportive woman we met the day before is gone. But her hunky husband (Brandon Sklenar) is helpful and apologetic. And smoldering. Uh-oh. Did we mention he’s hunky?
If at first we understand that the housekeeper is being a little manipulative — lying to get the job, for instance, or wearing glasses to seem more serious — we soon realize that all kinds of gaslighting games are being played behind these gates, and they’re much more impactful.
Based on Freida McFadden’s novel, “The Housemaid” rides waves of manipulation and then turns the tables on what we think we’ve just seen, looking at male-female power structures and how privilege can trap people without it.
The film is as good looking as the actors, with nifty touches like having the main house spare, well-lit and bright, while the husband’s private screening room in the basement is done in a hellish red. There are little jokes throughout, like the husband and the housemaid bonding over old episodes of “Family Feud,” with the name saying it all.
Feig and his team also have fun with horror movie conventions, like having a silent, foreboding groundskeeper, adding a creepy dollhouse and placing lightning and thunder during a pivotal scene. They surround the mansion with fussy, aristocratic PTA moms who have tea parties and say things like “You know what yoga means to me.”
Feig’s fascinating combination of gore, torture and hot sex ends happily, capped off with Taylor Swift’s perfectly conjured “I Did Something Bad” playing over the end credits. Not at all: This naughty movie is definitely on the nice list.
“The Housemaid,” a Lionsgate release that’s in theaters Friday, is rated R by the Motion Picture Association for strong bloody violence, gore, language, sexuality/nudity and drug use. Running time: 131 minutes. Three and a half stars out of four.
Related
Entertainment
How Southern California punk veterans built 84 Days’ politically charged debut album
When playing in a legendary South Bay punk band is your day job, most people likely wouldn’t have too many musical side projects. But most people aren’t Pennywise bassist Randy Bradbury.
Having frequently kept the door open for different bands and genres of music, Bradbury’s newest project is the Huntington Beach-based 84 Days. The trio features the veteran songwriter on guitar and lead vocals, Grammy-winning rock producer Cameron Webb on bass and No Doubt’s Adrian Young on drums (at least for the self-titled debut album) — and while 84 Days’ sound and tempo differs significantly from Pennywise, it’s still very much a punk-leaning rock band.
When asked about the name, Bradbury says, “The term ’84 Days’ originally started as an inside joke back when I was a teenager, but watching the world change so much it seems to be a fitting description for how things have become … like something I read in a book once. And now we’re in it.”
Though it may seem odd to launch a new band after more than a collective century of experience in the music industry, Bradbury and Webb agree that 84 Days “sounded like too much fun” to not pursue. And if their debut show at DiPiazza’s in Long Beach back in November was anything to go off of, it’ll be a good time for fans too.
“I think the Randy Bradbury name is bigger than you would think,” Webb says via Zoom. “People obviously relate him to Pennywise, but he’s an individual that a lot of people like — especially other musicians. Everyone knows him and thinks he’s great, so people have just been really supportive of everything.”
“I was just waiting to see what the reaction to the songs would be,” Bradbury adds. “I’d say it’s been very positive so far, so I think we’ll have Green Day opening for us in about a year.”
Jokes about the new band’s popularity aside, Bradbury and Webb’s years in the industry have given 84 Days the kind of platform and connections most bands can only dream of. Case in point, when Young was unable to continue with his drumming duties for the band’s first live shows, Bradbury was able to recruit his friend Erik “Smelly” Sandin from NOFX to fill in for the time being.
“We’ve both been in the Southern California music scene for decades, so I know a lot of people and made a lot of friends,” Bradbury says. “I’ve kept note of who are the players I look up to and would love to play with; as soon as I found out Adrian wasn’t going to play with us, I knew I was going to ask [Sandin].”
“We’re friends with these people because I work with them or Randy tours with them, so we cross paths all the time in the studio or at shows,” Webb says. “Everyone’s been really supportive of me, who doesn’t do it every day. No one’s like ‘You shouldn’t be doing that.’ They’re like, ‘I can’t wait to see this’ or ‘You’re going to kill it.’ So it does make me feel good to see the community be excited for us to play a show.”
But as Bradbury is quick to point out, all of those connections are “contingent on if you’re doing something interesting” and if the music itself is actually good. Thankfully, between Bradbury’s elite writing chops and Webb’s tastemaking ability (as usually seen behind the scenes on other bands’ albums), 84 Days’ self-titled debut isn’t just a fun punk jaunt but a deep look into how the songwriter views the current state of society and the world — including topics that wouldn’t exactly fit ahead of “Bro Hymn” in a Pennywise setlist.
Even though 84 Days may have been founded around the idea of being a “fun” project for its members, none of them is interested in sticking with it if the band itself is less than stellar. While Bradbury is used to performing for a living, the looming threat of live shows encouraged Webb to genuinely practice and tighten his bass skills, having primarily only picked one up previously to help in the studio from time to time.
“I grab instruments a lot, but now I had to learn all these songs and rehearse them,” Webb says. “I’ve got to know my s— and play them as well as the pros that do it every single day. I want us to be a killer band, so we’re going to be a killer band. That just means it’s time to stop goofing around. Instead of going home and watching TV, I’m practicing. I’m learning parts. I’m working on riffs. I’m doing all of that. It’s super fun because Randy makes it a great experience. We’re having a good time doing it and everything’s real positive, so we’re going to keep doing it.”
Just a few shows and one album into their career, it’s too early to tell what the ceiling is for 84 Days. The duo could see it continuing to just play bars and small venues or growing into something much larger. In fact, Bradbury laughs at the idea of some of the bands he knows opening for them — as long as it’s not his new band upstaging Pennywise.
“I think that that tour would end with a lot of bruises on my body and a lot of smashed guitars and basses.”
Movie Reviews
‘The Spongebob Movie: Search for Squarepants’ Review: Adventure Romp Soaks up a Good Time for SpongeBob Fans of All Ages
I’m convinced that each SpongeBob movie released on the big screen serves as a testament to the current state of the series. The 2004 film was a send-off for the early series run. Sponge Out of Water symbolized the Paul Tibbitt era, and Sponge on the Run served as a major transitional period between soft reboot and spin-off setup. The team responsible for Search for SquarePants, which consists of current showrunners Marc Ceccarelli and Vince Waller, as well as the seasoned Kaz, is showcasing their comedic and absurdist abilities. The sole purpose of the film is to elicit laughter with its distinctively silly and irreverent, whimsical humor. More so than its predecessor, it creates a mindless romp. Granted, there are far too many butt-related jokes, to a weird degree.
Truthfully, I am apprehensive about the insistence of each SpongeBob movie being CG-animated. However, Drymon, who directed the final Hotel Transylvania film, Transformania, brings the series’ quirky, outrageous 2D-influenced poses and expressive style into a 3D space. Its CG execution, done by Texas-based Reel FX (Book of Life, Rumble, Scoob), is far superior to Mikros Animation’s Sponge on the Run, which, despite its polish, has experimental frame rate issues with the comic timing and is influenced by The Spider-Verse. FX encapsulates the same fast, frenetic pace in its absurdist humor, which enables a significant number of the jokes to be effective and feel like classic SpongeBob.
With lovely touches like gorgeous 2D artwork in flashback scenes and mosaic backgrounds during multiple action shots, Drymon and co expand the cinematic scope, enhancing its theatrical space. Taking on a darker, if not more obscene, tone in the main underworld setting, the film’s purple- and green-infused visual palette adds a unique shine that sets it apart from other Sponge-features. Its strong visual aesthetic preserves the SpongeBob identity while capturing the spirit of swashbuckling and satisfying a Pirates of the Caribbean void in the heart.
The film’s slapstick energy is evident throughout, as it’s purposefully played as a romp. The animators’ hilarious antics, which make the most of each set piece to a comical degree, feel like the ideal old-fashioned love letter to the new adults who grew up with SpongeBob and are now introducing it to their kids. This is a perfect bridge. There’s a “Twelfth Street Rag” needle drop in a standout montage sequence that will have older viewers astral projecting with joy.
Search for SquarePants retreads water but with a charming swashbuckling freshness.
-
Iowa4 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Washington1 week agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa5 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine2 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland4 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota4 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Nebraska1 week agoNebraska lands commitment from DL Jayden Travers adding to early Top 5 recruiting class