This time I care, since Kate Winslet and Anna Paquin won, and I´m very happy for both of them.

But speaking of awards, for me the best are the Emmys, then Oscar, then Golden Globes....

I will say not that much anymore. It was nice to see Slumdog get pushed to being the front runner but who didnt think that some votes were bought for Mrs. Winslet? Yes I can understand her performance in The Reader pulling an upset but no one has given her a chance for best actress which is going to be a heavyweight fight between the two Devil Wears Prada ladies. Oh Mary Ann if you really like American history then you'll like John Adams. If not, well then try not to view it from a liberal perspective.

Before children, illness and other lifestyle modifying events, I would watch both the Golden Globes and the Oscars from start to finish - including all the red carpet nonsense. Occasionally, it would be a group watch with friends, but often it would be me alone (my husband is so not into awards shows), which was fine.

I even had a traditional awards show meal I always ate while watching. It was fun, but as my life changed, my ability and interest in sitting through 4+ hours of this sort of thing waned considerably.

But I did manage to watch last night - I was interested in more of the films than usual. It was fun. But now I am tired.

AAARRRRGHHH!!! When will Michael C. Hall win his much deserved globe for best actor on a tv show?
At least "Dexter" got a nod for best Drama...
On a side note, does anyone know to whom was Heath Ledger's more than earned globe given?

I love award shows. All and any. And was especially pleased with last night's results. I was ecstatic over the Slumdog Millionaire sweep, a worthy film indeed. But I was over-the-hills happy for Kate Winslet's double win. I prefer her role in The Reader, but she was also very good in Revolutionary Road

@Chris

"But no one has given her a chance for best actress which is going to be a heavyweight fight between the two Devil Wears Prada ladies."

Actually Kate Winslet has won more critic awards for her role in Revolutionary Road than Meryl Streep's role in Doubt. Though they are both beat by Sally Hawkins and Anne Hathaway, but not by a considerable amount. SAG will tell us much about this volatile category, but I'm hoping Winslet picks up two more awards at the Oscars.

Although I care about the Academy Awards much more, the Golden Globes program is more fun to watch because they're all sitting around tables, drinking, getting up and down before and after commercial breaks, mingling with each other, not getting cut off during acceptance speeches, etc. No boring song performances, yet adequate clips from nominated films (something Oscar stopped doing), etc.

I don't watch any of them though I'll flip on the Oscars to see who won the big awards at the end. For the most part I find award shows tedious and too often I tend to disagree with the winners so...nope, don't watch.

I've never understood how the Golden Globes got transformed into an award event that matters. They first came out in the 60s and for the first 20 years they were regarded by the majority of people with a who-gives-a-damn attitude. They are simply the opinion of about 20 foreign films journalists, a group that is very odd for who it includes and who it excludes. Bottom line is that I don't really 'care' about any of the awards. I've never watched more than moments of the Golden Globes. I watch the Oscars more out of fond habit than anything else, largley because I like seeing the celebs. And Maryann, 'John Adams' was terrific film-making. Dozens of excellent performances, fascinating, realistically gritty production values, and a shocking look at how the 'framers' saw the role of government and people in society compared to what we've made of it today.

KLW - while I will agree that the Globes were, for many years, something of a joke, it's grown up somewhat in the last 10 years. Plus it's fun to watch all the celebs getting drunk :)

Also, just to nitpick, the Golden Globes started in 1944, and currently have about 90 members of the foreign press as voting members.

Ryan,

After last night I have Kate at two wins, one for the globes the other for the St. Louis critics and I have Meryl with three wins and more nominations. I keep forgetting Sally Hawkins just because I think she is going to get overlooked and the fact that she had her own seperate category to dominate last night. It has been those three women though at the top, Sally, Anne and Meryl with Kate probably in fourth. Truth be told she didnt have the best performance of that film. Michael Shannon has been robbed this whole award season if you ask me. You are right though the SAG's are usually the best indicator on who will be the front runner the final month.

Meryl Streep - Washington DC, Phoenix, Kansas, BFCA
Kate Winslet - Alliance of Women Journalist, St. Louis, Las Vegas*, Golden Globes

*For her work in Revolutionary Road AND The Reader.

So we're both wrong to an extent. So they both wins with three small critic groups and one major win (BFCA and GG). It really should be Hathaway vs. Hawkins if we go by critic awards, but Winslet and Streep have their name recognition working for them big time as well as "due" factor.

I was glad that Colin Farrell won the Best Actor in a Comedy for In Bruges. I still feel that wonderful film belongs in the Drama category.

For the Globes itself, I completely forgotten about it and I didn't lose any sleep over that.

My primary reaction: Looks like I’m gonna have to finally watch John Adams...

John Adams rocked...in a historical way of course. The one detail I liked was the flies. You always heard something buzzing around, really kept you aware of how bad those people probably smelled back then. And of course, you get to watch the God-like Paul Giamatti do his thing, which is always top-notch.

The golden globes to me is about as Intriguing as the CMA's,but for some reason I wanted to know what was worth seeing, since I'm still convinced 2008 didn't have to many good movies.
I kinda wanna see Brad Pitt's movie since I learned Fincher did it, and I kinda lightened up to the fact Slumdog Millionaire, I'm willing to give it a chance. Not because it won but because of what the screenwriter said.
The things that still remain the same, I'll never give Mamma Mia a shot,being as I hate Abba, and as funny as 30 rock,the Office and Entourage are I still don't watch them. I should but I don't, because I'm a movie goer not a Tv person

I have conflicting feelings about awards shows in general. Mostly I think they're total bullshit, but I still get excited when a movie or actor wins an award I feel is deserved -- kinda like how I cheer for my favorite films to at least recoup their money in theaters so the director/writer/whomever can go on to make more movies.

As for watching the broadcasts, gawd no. If I wanted to see celebrities kiss each other's asses I'd pay for a subscription to Mr. Skin.

"Care" is an awfully strong word. I watched, as unlike the Oscars, the Golden Globes can actually be entertaining depending on who is presenting/how drunk that person happens to be. But do I really care? No, not really.

Evidenced by the fact that I DVR'd it and watched the whole broadcast in about 25 minutes or less, with my finger on the fast-forward button the whole time, prepared to zoom through every time I lost interest. Which was most of the time.

D, Chris Nolan picked up Heath's (I agree, more than deserved) award. I don't know who's going to get to keep it--maybe there's a provision in his will for "All of my awards, assuming I won any..." This is unlikely, given that he hadn't prepared enough to will a trust fund to his daughter (though class acts that they are, the three actors taking his place in the movie he had started filming at the time of his death donated their salaries into such a fund); I doubt, given that he hadn't won many at that point, that he would have put anything in his will regarding a few trophies. Commentators are speculating it will go to his daughter, though.

No.
I don't care about any awards.