The globes arguably draw from a wider base and therefore, also arguably, there is more competition. C.F. Commonwealth Games gold medal vs Olympic. But prestige may come from being niche and focussed in criteria. If there was a Nobel prize for cheerleading, I really don't think I'd respect it much!
The oscars are just for film. While the golden globes are for everybody. If acting in a movie isn't your thing, just shoot for an emmy or a golden globe instead. Im just glnna put more words here. Cheesecake rabbits air pjgs feet butter nickles spongebob jillpop grunkle staaan gd
Yyyyyyy Yyyyyyy have had been sent some sort so sorry so sorry so we will work with what we want with what we want with what we want with what we want with what we want with what she. Defference do dinner date so. W de forma gt. T el día fue. R el sábado f te. Vs f f r. E se debe hacer t respuesta de forma tal razón social. F te recomiendo de forma tr el w de forma fácil de. S de ropa te. W se refiere te recomiendo. D de forma rápida r 4 4 4 e
Sfsdfdsfffffffffffffffffffffffffdx gg g sgf j j jj j j jj j j j jj j j j j j j jj jk jkj kk j kjk j kjk jk j jk jk jk jk jk kk jkj kj k jk j kj kj kj kj k kj kj k kjk
Yea the same time. I'm sure it will not break the news that you are looking to get the dog is the most part, I have to say. The only only way I see the world, but it's more like this one is the most part, I have to say.
The Golden Globes has the right idea: you split the award for such things as Best Motion Picture and Best Actor/Actress into two categories, Musical/Comedy and Drama. This way, you can acknowledge two films in which case both deserve the award. For example, both "The Graduate" and "In the Heat of the Night" won awards, Best Motion Picture - Musical/Comedy and Best Motion Picture - Drama, respectively. Both are great films, and both deserved the awards. I also felt that The Graduate was more deserving of the Oscar than "In the Heat of the Night," because Hoffman was excellent in it and the ending is absolutely fantastic. The Globes definitely has my vote.
Hello I'm a big Animated fan and this year It awarded to the best Animated films of 2014: How To Train Your Dragon 2 won at the Golden Globes while Big Hero 6 won at the Oscars. Both have the same storyline about Losing the ones you love and bring hope in the end. This is the same happend when the Golden Globes introduced this category in 2007 when Pixar's Cars Awarded while Warner Bros. Happy Feet took home the oscars. Another one is in 2012 when "The Adventures of TinTin" won at the Globes while "Rango" got an Oscars and both films are from Paramount Pictures. After that Both the Golen Globes and Oscars awarded to the same Animated Films. Ratatouille, WALL-E, UP, Toy Story 3, Brave, Frozen both are Golden Globes and Oscars winners. I guess this will continue this trend of awarding a different Animated film from the Globes and Oscars.
While yes, in it's history, the Golden Globes have made such god-awful decisions as Pia Zadora, in recent years, the Globes have continuously been awarding superior movies and performances. Consider Anne Hathaway's win for Les Miserables, in which she practically self-mutilated herself to the point of an Oscar win. The Oscars don't reward perfectly controlled performances anymore. Winning an Oscar for acting means you've likely done something that shouts "look at me!" rather than demonstrating your skills (i.E.: Jared Leto - Dallas Buyers Club). The Golden Globes actually bother to at least give recognition to great performances that didn't require live hair-cutting or shrieking for effect.
As for the movies themselves, last year the Globes recognized films like "Inside Llewelyn Davis" and "All is Lost", films which were snubbed by the Academy. Best of all, they don't feel as obligated to give awards to people who simply haven't received one yet. The Oscars historically gloss over great films in order to honor someone they snubbed in the past for a piece which was actually great. A wonderful example is their awarding "How Green is My Valley" with several oscars including Best Picture. This move was merely their belated pat on John Ford's back, when in fact, Orson Welles' masterpiece "Citizen Kane" was released the same year. While the Golden Globes were only established a year later, they rarely give "make up" awards.
Looking through the scope of history, it's obvious that recieving an award doesn't cement your place in it (hey, who remembers "Cimarron", anyone?) However, most consider the Oscars to be more important, but in recent years, the Golden Globes have been routinely making better decisions. While the Oscars are associated with prestige, we as critical viewers need to look past the fact that this prestige is just gold-plated pretense. But in times like these, we need to turn our focus away from these petty arguments, and turn our attention to the giant popularity contest that is the Grammys.
The Golden Globes tend to hold a bit more prestige in the public eye than the Oscars do. They are similar, as both are related based on public perception and choice. The person below me is wrong, however, it is no based on a public vote. There is a group of specific people in the industry who make the decisions.
I feel that too much emphasis is put into deciding which is better, Golden Globes or the Oscars. I actually feel that both are equal. Both are bases on public choice. When the public makes these decision I don't feel that they take into consideration which organization is more significant.
Important entertainment awards: Emmys, Grammys, Oscars, and Tonys. Emmys-Award important television shows are awarded. Grammys-Awards the best music in each genre over the past year. Oscars-Award the best movies, actors, and actresses and are generally based on all-time achievement under the guise of one movie or work. Tonys-Award the best of theatre.
The Oscars have and always will be more significant than the Golden Globes because they feature a far more prominent part of the entertainment industry, which of course is film. That is the one reason alone the Oscars will always be more significant and always occupy a more important part.
1. Pia Zadora in "Butterfly" won a GG for that god awful movie and she gave a god awful performance.(1981)
2. The Oscars command and demand high acclaim.
3. No one remembers a Golden Globe winner BUT everyone who has won (or been nominated) for an Oscar has that distinction noted when that person is being written about in the media. The Oscars forever.
How many times have you heard an actor being touted as "Golden Globe winning?" Not very often (sometimes, yes, but not very often). How about "Oscar winning?" Yep, that's the one. You also never hear young actors hoping to win a Golden Globe in the future, but everyone says they want to win an Oscar. That alone means that the Oscars are more significant than the Golden Globes.
Awards are awesome and signify the acknowledgment of a great piece of work or the accomplishment of a great task. However, awards are usually based on opinions and therefore are pretty subjective. So to say the Golden Globes are more significant than the Oscars is just another opinion on a subject that exist only because of opinion. So no, the Golden Globes are not more significant than the Oscars.
I don't believe there can be any serious dispute as to which award is more prestigious. By way of an analogy, if we were speaking of athletics, the Oscars would be the Olympics, while the Golden Globes would be the Pan-Am Games. That said, a Golden Globe is a solid entry-level award for an actor.
I think both awards are very prestigious and the person who wins either is a very fine actor/actress but all said and done the oscars outweigh the golden globes. We judge movies by oscar nominations and wins not by golden globe nominations or wins.
Also the oscar ceremony is much more grand.