news The Golden Globes Gets Political: Stars Talk Climate Change, Australian Fires, and Going Vegan

Entertainment awards shows have long been a venue for actors to deliver political messages to the masses, from Marlon Brando orchestrating a protest against the depiction of Native Americans in Hollywood at the 1973 Oscars to Meryl Streep speaking out against Donald Trump at the 2017 Golden Globes. Sunday’s Globes ceremony continued the rich tradition of stars promoting progressive politics.

The topic of the evening was the bushfires ravaging Australia. The fires, which have been affecting the country since September, have killed 20 people, destroyed thousands of buildings, and burned 14.8 million acres so far this season.

Australian Russell Crowe was not present to accept his award for Best Actor in a Miniseries or TV Film for his portrayal of Fox News boss Roger Ailes in “The Loudest Voice” because he was home with his family in the fire-ravaged country.

Jennifer Aniston read a statement on Crowe’s behalf: “Make no mistake, the tragedy unfolding in Australia is climate-change based. We need to act based on science, move our global workforce to renewable energy, and respect our planet for the unique and amazing place it is.”

Fellow Australians Cate Blanchett, Margot Robbie, and Nicole Kidman were all Golden Globes nominees, and Naomi Watts was a presenter.

“When one country faces a climate disaster, we all face a climate disaster,” Blanchett said.

In her acceptance speech for Best Supporting Actress – Series, Miniseries or TV Film for “The Act,” Patricia Arquette addressed both the fire and the state of affairs between the US and Iran. That country’s top general, Qasem Soleimani, was killed January 3 by a US drone strike, prompting Iranian officials to vow revenge against the US.

“I know tonight, January 5, 2020, we’re not going to look back on this night in the history books. We will see a country on the brink of war, the United States of America, a president tweeting out a threat of 52 bombs, including cultural sites, young people risking their lives traveling across the world, people not knowing if bombs are going to drop on their kids’ heads, and the continent of Australia on fire,” Arquette said. “So while I love my kids so much, I beg of us all to give them a better world. For our kids and their kids, we have to vote in 2020, and we have to get — beg and plead for everyone we know to vote in 2020.”

But for Joaquin Phoenix, who won Best Actor, Drama for “Joker,” Hollywood elite should do more.

“It’s great to vote, but sometimes we have to take that responsibility on ourselves and make changes and sacrifices in our own lives and hope that we can do that. We don’t have to take private jets to Palm Springs for the awards,” he said. “I’ll try to do better, and I hope you will too.”

Phoenix, who is vegan, praised the Globes for offering a strictly plant-based menu at the ceremony, a topic he elaborated on when talking to reporters backstage by highlighting the ecological benefits of moving away from animal agriculture and meat-eating.

“I’ve never been so proud to attend an awards ceremony as I am tonight,” he said.

Michelle Williams focused on abortion rights in her acceptance speech for best actress in a miniseries for “Fosse/Verdon” — a speech during which NBC’s telecast cut several times to Busy Philipps, who heartily approved of Williams’ message — and Kate McKinnon, who is a lesbian, highlighted the importance of Ellen DeGeneres’s character on “Ellen” becoming the first gay sitcom lead when presenting DeGeneres with the Carol Burnett award.
 
I personally despise celebrities getting political during awards shows. If I want politics I'll watch a network news program. Awards shows are supposed to be a celebration of the entertainment crafts, not a spewing of uninformed political diatribes to score points. What irks me the most, however, is that, at least when it comes to actors, their personal beliefs impact my perception of their characters - sometimes I no longer believe them in their roles, I just know that they are full of bull crap.
 
I personally despise celebrities getting political during awards shows. If I want politics I'll watch a network news program. Awards shows are supposed to be a celebration of the entertainment crafts, not a spewing of uninformed political diatribes to score points. What irks me the most, however, is that, at least when it comes to actors, their personal beliefs impact my perception of their characters - sometimes I no longer believe them in their roles, I just know that they are full of bull crap.

did you watch the monologue i posted?

ricki says ~"just take your awards and shut up, no one cares about your causes - most of you spent less time in school than greta thunberg(a high school dropout)"

savage
 
Even when I disagree with what they say, I respect people who take advantage of the opportunity to say something that's important to them. We know they thank mom and dad and their agent and yada yada yada. But to risk pissing off probably half the country (whatever side they're on), takes guts and I respect that.
 
Even when I disagree with what they say, I respect people who take advantage of the opportunity to say something that's important to them. We know they thank mom and dad and their agent and yada yada yada. But to risk pissing off probably half the country (whatever side they're on), takes guts and I respect that.

Really does that hold true even if they're damaging the country with anti-science opinions like telling parents to stop vaccinating their children?
Do actions like that fill you with a sense of respect for them?

Damn we are close to having a political thread here - what are you doing to us indie news!!
 
Last edited:
Really does that hold true even if they're damaging the country with anti-science opinions like telling parents to stop vaccinating their children?
Do actions like that fill you with a sense of respect for them?

Damn we are close to having a political thread here - what are you doing to us indie news!!

Semi-political thread warning! :)

That's a good point and no, I don't respect that.

But there are plenty of other areas that I consider important and I do believe that those who oppose my views damage the world (climate change, a woman's right to choose, Trump's wall). Yet I would respect them for taking the risk of addressing the issue while accepting an award.

In general (and again, there certainly are exceptions) there are actors and directors who I know I strongly disagree with politically, yet I respect and admire their work. Clint Eastwood comes to mind immediately, along with The Rock and James Woods.
 
Semi-political thread warning! :)

That's a good point and no, I don't respect that.

But there are plenty of other areas that I consider important and I do believe that those who oppose my views damage the world (climate change, a woman's right to choose, Trump's wall). Yet I would respect them for taking the risk of addressing the issue while accepting an award.

In general (and again, there certainly are exceptions) there are actors and directors who I know I strongly disagree with politically, yet I respect and admire their work. Clint Eastwood comes to mind immediately, along with The Rock and James Woods.

Well its ignorant for me to say that actors should never say anything political... not when two of our presidents have been tv stars and the governor of CA was the terminator. But my problem is when you've got an actor that was in hollywood since 6 years old and they would flunk a GED because their only education is show business.. then they get a microphone and talk about economics and people listen to them because they acted like a smart guy on tv once. I dont think it's a problem that will ever be solved unfortunately but damn did ricki roast them for it. what a great monologue.
 
I grew up in a very religious family – born-again, evangelical. As my immediate
family changed, my extended family didn’t. It became a topic of conversation
how (aunt/uncle/cousin) would always invoke Jesus and/or God in everything.
Sometimes it seemed appropriate and sometimes it seemed overkill - “don't
keep shoving it in my face.”

That's the way I feel about the current political climate and award shows. I deeply,
deeply believe they have the right to talk about what they believe in – I wish they
would use some self control. I know exactly how every, single person in that room
feels about Trump, Republicans, abortion, climate change; there is no need to
shove it in my face.

But I do get it; I can relate. Social justice and politics is their religion. It is essential
they preach at every moment they can.

It takes guts to speak truth to power. Every person who accepted an award and
spoke their truth did not have guts, was not brave – they were in a “church” and
they were preaching to the choir. Gervais was brave. He's the one with guts.

And he was right. I would love to spend 3 hours simply celebrating movies and TV.
 
And that's the way I feel when anyone accepting an award thanks God, or Jesus, or whoever they believe in.
It irks me the way the political stuff does others. Because I'm a non-believer, I don't want to hear it. You did it - celebrate that.
But I get that it's important to other people, just as politics is (extremely) important to me. In my family, a "mixed marriage" would be the other political party.
 
These actors have a particular kind of platform that is different, and perhaps more revered, than those who are on morning TV shows, or radio talkback shows etc. and I think it can be important for people with a platform to speak their truth, and to bring attention to some issues that are extremely important.

There are people who feel comforted, or empowered or inspired when these actors speak the way they do sometimes and fortunately or unfortunately, the Golden Globes or The Emmy's or The Oscars is one of few times these actors and actresses have the ability to utilise their unique platform. Sure, they're on TV promoting a film, but how often are they able to pivot from talking about the latest Marvel film to the climate catastrophe, or women's rights - and even if they do, how often is it edited out for time?

I don't really begrudge actors using their platform, especially now we have time limits on their speeches... I would honestly rather listen to 2-5 minutes of 'here's a bit of my story to inspire anyone out there who needs reassurance' or 'here's some info about climate change we need to do something, Australia is on fire (and it really is :( )' than 2-5 minutes of someone reading a list of names.
 
did you watch the monologue i posted?

Of course I watched it; you couldn't miss it, it was on almost every news feed that I view.

And that's the way I feel when anyone accepting an award thanks God, or Jesus, or whoever they believe in.

The difference is that most (though not all) who thank their Supreme Being do not spend their entire acceptance speech talking about their religion.

These actors have a particular kind of platform that is different, and perhaps more revered, than those who are on morning TV shows, or radio talkback shows etc. and I think it can be important for people with a platform to speak their truth, and to bring attention to some issues that are extremely important.

That's what Twitter, etc. is for. Ain't the modern age great? The debate, at least from my point of view, is that I don't WANT politics mixed in with my entertainment.
 
Last edited:
And I DO want politics mixed with my entertainment.
So sometimes I'll get it my way, and sometimes you'll get it yours.
Both of us have the option of turning it off.
 
Last edited:
An all too common response. And that's why we are becoming so
divided; each “side” simply turns off the other side. And the end
result is we become more and more insulated in our “tribe”.

I find it curious that those who don't want religion in their entertainment
want politics in it. But I know that's because I don't want either of them.

Maybe if there was a little more diversity of points of view from those
getting awards I'd accept it better.
 
That's what Twitter, etc is for
Whilst there’s an overlap in audience between Twitter and those watching traditional TV broadcasts, there is a big difference in the number of people actively reached and the demographics reached between the two. I think the point is getting it out of the echo chamber of your followers (though as someone who doesn’t use Twitter I can’t be sure 🤷🏻‍♀️).
 
Back
Top