Now that the Oscars are all settled (see all three Conversation posts last week if you somehow missed the controversy), it's time for the Golden Globes to seek attention, and there's a bit of fuss on that front as the Hollywood Foreign Press Association considers hiring back tactless funnyman Ricky Gervais as host -- or have no host at all. They have to decide by the end of this week, and the debate is so far pretty balanced with the pros and cons. Perhaps the comedian needs to say something really inappropriate, a la Brett Ratner, to tip the scale? Last week, Gervais revealed that NBC wants him to return, but it's really up to the HFPA.
According to Deadline, an unnamed source spelled out the points that are dividing the organization:
“NBC has put the HFPA in a lose-lose situation. If the Hollywood Foreign Press says yes to Ricky, it risks turning the Globes into The Ricky Gervais Show and leaving the impression that they’re annually throwing a great party while inviting someone who humiliates all of the guests. If it says no, the HFPA looks like it has no sense of humor about itself. The problem is, if you have Ricky, the show tends to wind up being all about him and how mean he can be. He effectively dwarfs the importance of the ceremony itself.”
Let's just pretend a Twitter thread started by Bret Easton Ellis doesn't insinuate the "source" is some kind of promotional tie-in to Gervais' new show, Life is Too Short (the word "dwarfs" being key). Is Gervais too selfish or too mean for a ceremony that's primarily supposed to be about international entertainment journalists kissing the asses of the Hollywood elite? Much of the discussion also revolves around whether it's better to have great ratings, as Gervais provides, or a classier brand and an event where all the guests are having a good time. As some point out, these celebs pretty much buy their way into a nomination and therefore the ceremony, so it might be up to the expected contenders to decide.
If you want my vote -- not that I'm an expected contender -- I think Gervais should co-host with Johnny Depp. At least we could rest assure no Tim Allen roasting will go on:
What are people saying about the debate on Ricky Gervais as Golden Globes host? Here's The Conversation heard around the blogosphere and Twitter:
Lolz to that last part: "the importance of the ceremony itself." This is the Golden Globes, where alcohol flows freely among the star-studded guests, and winners sometimes (but not always) are in the bathroom when their names are announced. (Hey, Christine Lahti!) - Christopher Rosen, Moviefone
I can’t even believe this is a real internal debate — of course they invite Gervais back (assuming he even wants to host; at this point he’d actually get more attention turning this sad, sad group down than he would taking their money and drinking their beer onstage). - S.T. VanAirsdale, Movieline
It seems their biggest concern is that he’s stealing the show. That actually makes sense, but if that’s the case, is that really a bad thing? In the long run, would Gervais stealing the show lessen the value of the awards themselves? Those who become Golden Globe winners that night will be remembered for the awards they won and (in some cases) what they won them for, not for the crack Gervais made about them at some point during the event. - Kelly West, Cinema Blend
@Dr_Bass: As the story says, he makes it all about him. Get rid.
@waychillbro: I hope the Golden Globes doesn't ask Ricky Germvais back. He's so disgusting looking and his teeth are just not the look.
@veraishq: So he did upset some famous people, but at least he was very funny!
@TMck1987: I want to see an A-List celeb cry ALOT!
@astinTO: But wouldn't that result in the Globes being more popular than the Oscars? And also, good?
Follow Christopher Campbell on Twitter (@thefilmcynic) to join The Conversation.