VOTES FOR SALE!
THE couture gowns have been fitted, red- carpet poses rehearsed and breathless, self- congratulatory acceptance speeches perfected with their requisite sprinkles of faux sincerity.
There’s just one last box for nominees to tick at the 72nd annual Golden Globes: Did the check clear?
There is a reason, after all, why some have nicknamed the ceremony “The Golden Bribes.”
“The Globes have always been the black sheep of the awards industry, and its credibility is pretty questionable,” one Hollywood executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity, tells The Post.
In 2013, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association — which presides over the Globes — settled a lawsuit with Michael Russell, who was the organization’s publicist for 17 years.
No details of the settlement were made public, but in his $ 2 million breach of contract and fraud suit, Russell claimed that he had been fired for attempting to tackle corruption within the ranks of his former employers.
Alleging that members routinely accepted money, holidays and gifts from movie studios in exchange for Golden Globes nominations, Russell’s suit added: “HFPA members abuse their positions and engage in unethical and potentially unlawful deals and arrangements which amount to a ‘ payola’ scheme.”
In 2011, the same year the suit was filed, even Hollywood’s most heavily Botoxed brows were raised when two universally derided pictures — Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp’s so- called thriller “The Tourist” ( which inspired such critical invective as “farcical,” “preposterous” and “craptacular”), and Christina Aguilera and Cher’s musical clunker “Burlesque” — received three Globe nominations apiece.
Could the voters’ fondness for these flops have anything to do with their all- expensespaid trip to Las Vegas — with luxury hotel rooms, food and a private performance by Cher — generously hosted by Sony Pictures, the distributor of the two abominable nominees? Certainly, many in the industry believe so. “When members are courted by a studio or a celebrity, it does influence how they feel about a particular movie or star,” one HFPA insider reveals. “Alot of these members work part time and for pretty obscure [ publications]; they still get very star- struck. Sometimes you’ll get A- list names personally calling them to wax lyrical about their movie: Who wouldn’t get excited to have Angelina Jolie purring down the end of the phone? Even Tom Cruise has been [ rumored] to send them handwritten Christmas cards.” Then there are the one- on- one lunches and intimate dinners. “Sometimes actors will even flirt with members; whatever it takes to ingratiate themselves,” the insider reveals. “Even though everyone in the industry knows that the awards lack any real credibility, they still generate huge publicity for their movies. And it’s a lot easier to curry favor with a few dozen HFPA members than it is to suck up to the Academy.”
So who are these Hollywood Foreign Press Association voters? While the name sounds worldly, many of them write — or, it’s said, sporadically write — for middling European or Middle Eastern publications. There is speculation that, for some, the association is basically a means to a green card.
All told, there are reportedly fewer than 90 members. And when it comes to awards- show integrity, it seems size matters.
Compare the HFPA’s ranks to the Oscars’ mothership, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which boasts more than 6,000 eligible voters. And the Screen Actors Guild polls 165,000- plus members for its SAG Awards — way too populous for payola.
The Week magazine’s entertainment editor Scott Meslow says the entire Globes infrastructure is a credibility minefield.
“Beyond the incredibly small voting bloc, membership requires the sponsorship of two existing members — which doesn’t lend itself to critical dissent in an appropriate way. There have been a lot of strange discrepancies in their nominations,” he says. “And [ I’ve] been at movie junkets and seen the HFPA members pulling
Sometimes actors will even flirt with [ globes voters]; whatever it takes to ingratiate themselves.”
out posters and asking stars for autographs.”
Fanboy behavior aside, for the chosen few that circumvent the organization’s jealously guarded velvet rope, membership is a golden ticket to the good life.
“HFPA members are onto an extraordinarily good thing,” one movie executive tells The Post. “They know how valuable each of their votes is to a studio or individual star. That gives them an astonishing amount of leverage, and they get unprecedented access to big names.
“It’s such a contrast ... some of these mem- bers live in tiny apartments and barely make rent, but their fridges are stocked with vintage Champagne.”
What gives? “They don’t talk about any of this, even amongst themselves — nobody wants to be ‘ found out,’” the exec continues. “It’s so hush- hush, it’s almost like a secret religious order.”
Among those who have paid their respects are Chris Rock’s “people,” who sent DVD players to Globes voters while promoting the sitcom “Everybody Hates Chris” ( it was nominated for best musical or comedy series in 2006).
And then there’s Sharon Stone. In 1999, her team sent each HFPA member a $ 400 Coach watch shortly before votes were due. The organization’s then- president Helmut Voss got wind of the controversy and insisted that the tainted timepieces be returned, but Stone still received a best actress for comedy or musical nod ( for her forgettable role in Albert Brooks’ “The Muse”).
Three years earlier, Stone won for best actress in the drama category for “Casino,” after the star apparently wined and dined Globes voters and exchanged personal appearances and other favors with the HFPA for support of her preferred charity, the American Foundation for AIDS Research. But the HFPA really earned its sleazy status way back in 1982, when it awarded “new star of the year” ( a category that no longer exists) to Pia Zadora for her performance in the critically mauled flop “Butterfly.”
It was later revealed that the film’s producer, Meshulam Riklis ( who was married to Zadora at the time), had flown members to Las Vegas for a weekend just before voting commenced and staged a screening in the couple’s palatial private residence.
Regardless of how tarnished the trophies may be, most in the industry are reluctant to speak out against the Globes, conscious of the career advancement opportunities that even the most dubious of accolades can expedite.
One of the very few prominent names to openly protest the Hollywood Foreign Press Association’s more questionable practices is actor/ producer/ director Rob Reiner.
“The one thing that’s most annoying and illegitimate about them is the way they conduct their interviews,” Reiner has said. “Each of these people asks to have their picture taken with you ... that kind of cheesiness permeates that organization.”
“The Dark Knight” star Gary Oldman is similarly scathing. In 2014, he told Playboy: “[ The Globes is] a meaningless event. The Hollywood Foreign Press Association is kidding you that something’s happening. They’re f-- king ridiculous. There’s nothing going on at all. It’s 90 nobodies having a w-- k. Everybody’s getting drunk, and everybody’s sucking up to everybody. Boycott the f-- king thing.”
Still, after decades in the credibility wilderness, it seems things are finally looking up for the Globes.
“They’ve really tried to clean house in the wake of the court case,” an awards insider confides. “Members have been issued ... strict edicts regarding standards the organization expects them to adhere to.”
Indeed, the most surprising thing about this year’s Globes nominations isn’t the also- ran inclusions, it’s the integrity of the shortlists.
Longstanding Globes favorite Angelina Jolie was totally shutout — her directorial effort “Unbroken” and starring turn in box office hit “Maleficent” both failed to receive a single nod, while less- starry contenders, such as “Birdman” and “The Imitation Game,” received strong showings.
The Globes might be on a much- needed January detox, but hopefully they don’t sober up completely. After all, that’s part of their charm. As Ricky Gervais, who hosted the awards in 2010, 2011 and 2012, put it: “The Golden Globes are to the Oscars what Kim Kardashian is to Kate Middleton: a bit louder, a bit trashier, a bit drunker and more easily bought.”