Golden Globes: pulling names out of a hat

I’ve always enjoyed the Golden Globes because of their random quality. (That and the fact that the nominees drink while awaiting their categories.) The winners almost always deserve a “huh?” response, if not a “who???” You could almost suspect that the 100 or so members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association put all possible candidates’ names in a hat and pull out some nominees, then repeat for the winners.

This was especially obvious during Sunday night’s list-reading by (on NBC) Billy Bush and Nancy O’Dell. I wish I’d thought to switch to E! or the TV Guide Channel to compare and contrast, but I didn’t, and I honestly can’t think it would have made much difference. When there’s no glitz, no glamour and no alcohol (at least, I’m assuming Billy wasn’t buzzed), there’s no hiding the fact that the choices are often bizarre.

Even in just an hour, there was too much blather and commentary from the hosts, especially Billy Bush (and what was up with his hair?), who seemed to think he was there to give his opinion on the winners, even when he didn’t have one. It was inappropriate for him to say Cate Blanchett didn’t deserve to win for “I’m Not There.” (Needless to say, she wasn’t there.)

On the positive side:

Jon Hamm and “Mad Men” win for TV drama. Much deserved. In Jon’s case, I’m sorry he wasn’t there to get the honor and maybe thank his alma mater, John Burroughs.

“Sweeney Todd,” best musical or comedy; Johnny Depp best actor in the category. I loved this movie, which I got to review.

Tina Fey, best actress in a TV comedy. Yes, indeed, she is. And “30 Rock” (not “Extras”) is TV’s best comedy.