the globes looked a little flat.

That was a depressing Golden Globes conference. There wasn't even any suspense or excitement to the show! Billy Bush and Nancy O'Dell could have at least tried to go for the long pauses after reading off the nominees before announcing the winner. And this would have been the year to do something like that, too, since there were a few surprises. I thought everyone was already rooting for Cate Blanchett to win for "I'm Not There" (in the category of Supporting Actress), but I guess that wasn't really the case (so I wasn't surprised when her name was called). Quite a few people, I realize now, were pulling for Amy Ryan to win for "Gone Baby Gone" - though Blanchett's film has been getting more glowing attention than Ryan's, which I think will be better for Blanchett's campaign to win once again at the upcoming Oscars (should they indeed happen).

Most of the other categories I could have predicted fairly easily, as the precursor awards (critics circles, top tens, etc.) were nearly consistent in favor of several folks. Daniel Day-Lewis for one, his performance is being likened to "Citizen Kane" and "The Treasure of Sierra Madre" and those kinds of references don't come by often at all. His previous competition was thought to be George Clooney for "Michael Clayton" but now it seems it's Johnny Depp (for "Sweeney Todd") since Clooney hasn't been able to pull away enough of the limelight from the notoriously-dedicated actor and Depp just won the Golden Globe for Actor in a Musical or Comedy. Julie Christie was also my guess for the win, and it appears she'll have little to fear come Oscar-time since most of the other nominees are in films that haven't been very successful as with Christie's "Away From Her". The nominees aren't out yet, of course, but if they retain mostly nominees from the Drama side of things (versus the nominees under Comedy/Drama) then Christie should have nothing to fear. Blanchett is already getting nods for her Bob Dylan portrayal so it's likely the AMPAS will just let her have that (assuming she wins there too). Besides, "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" wasn't a very well-received film. "Atonement" was, however, but it isn't particularly noted for Keira Knightley's performance in it. If Christie doesn't get it (but as one of the only veterans in this category, she's very likely to), it'll go to Angeline Jolie or Marion Cotillard, the latter for her role in "La Vie en Rose" which, like "Elizabeth" and unlike "Atonement", is only being recognized for the performance more so than the film itself.

The only real upsets for me were for Director and Dramatic Picture. I understand that "Diving Bell" hardly got its dues in the nominations (snubs in the Picture and Acting categories), but I have a strong feeling that the Hollywood Foreign Press really gave Julian Schnabel the award because they opted not to even nominate him in the Picture category. No doubt the man touches some nerves with his creative filmic reflection of the lead character's plight, but next to the superb work of the Coens in "No Country for Old Men", I don't think there's quite a contest - it should have gone to the gruesome twosome. I do suppose that feeling good will always win out against feeling disconcerted, and "No Country" had that bleakness in spades. (For the record, I'd have chosen Paul Thomas Anderson in this category were it up to me, because the man has not only reinvigorated his career, which wasn't failing in any way, shape or form, but he's done so in a way that's vastly different from his previous body of work. His direction of actors is astonishing and his knack for layered visual storytelling is sparkling.)

When one of the Access Hollywood hosts announced Julian Schnabel as the winner for Director, I started making bets that "No Country" was going to win not only because it deserves to, but also because the Coens got robbed in that category and they needed to be compensated for it. So for "Atonement" to win is well and good, but it was rather upsetting for me at the time because I don't think "Atonement" will hold up as well in the process of aging, whereas "No Country for Old Men" will be around for decades to come, yearning to be digested for its tough moral and literary content. I still love "Atonement", though, and hope it still makes the nomination at least for Best Picture at the Oscars, but I'm crossing my fingers for "No Country" not to mention my personal favorite of the year, "There Will Be Blood".

If neither of those two films win for Picture next month, then there will, indeed, be blood.