Golden Globe Awards

Hollywood Finds Its Party Mood for the Golden Globe Awards Ceremony
By Brooke Barnes and Michael Cieply
The New York Times, The Arts

This article is about the globes that were awarded to celebrities for their work. The article began with which award was awarded to who and it mentioned some of the people who presented the awards. Barnes and Cieply wrote that the Golden Globe Awards was televised in more than 160 channels and more than 20 million people were expected to watch it. They even mentioned what other events were happening at the same time, which was the season premiere of “24” on Fox.

The tone of this article is a “success” tone, because the way Barnes and Cieply covered this event seems like everything went as usual; celebrities walk the red carpet, the awards are presented and received. Nothing special happened. The vocabulary was good, but not enough to excite the readers. One thing I liked about this article is , aside from what happened at the event, Barnes and Cieply compared the event to the Oscars and how the Golden Globe awards is more relaxed. At the end, they have a dinner party with champagne, which is not a big deal, but the Oscars party more than anything.

I like the sentence where they introduce the Disney Channel stars: “The press association had tried to curate a show that featured a younger set of stars, something that it had hoped to attract younger viewers. To that end, Zac Efron and Vanessa Hudgens, the stars of Disney’s “High School Musical” franchise, were presenters along with the Jonas Brothers.” -Barnes and Cieply

This is a great sentence, because the article was boring, and this excited me, because I am a Disney Channel fan. The article has no excitement to it, because it seems like the event is the same every year with different titles of the movies and artists that get awarded.

The “but” sentence was in the beginning of the middle part of the article. The sentence says that the Golden Globes was not taken seriously as an “artistic milestones” and has history of voting “idiosyncrasies,” but it is viewed as vital to maintaining momentum in the Oscar marathon.