Golden Globes .. Are you watching? — Page 3

She looked HOT because she CAN but more importantly, because SHE IS!

HATERS GONNA HATE!

I agree with you about JLo, Carlos. She can still pull off stuff like that. I know I couldn't.

Keira Knightly looked unfortunate though. When she said like 30 people from Chanel made that dress, I was embarrassed for them. And I get that she's pregnant, but I've seen other pregnant women look a lot better. Even some who were almost 9 months along. I also agree that Lena Dunham needs to do better with fitting. It reminded me of some of the not so greatly constructed dresses I made in high school for my proms and dances.

---

I thought she looked pretentious. HOT but pretentious.

---

Trying to hard when she doesn't need to. She is so beautiful. I thought she could elicit the kind of reaction I think she wanted by wearing a less whorish outfit.

---

@ DAME: You consider that outfit whorish?!! Really?!!

Age is just a number. I get if something isn't someone's taste, totally fine. But, if you have the body and don't look too old or young for something, then wear it. I'm only 30, but I know I would look awful in JLo's dress. Or better yet, if I could, I'd probably get called a whore because I can just pass for 18-22. And by the logic of age, how come Jane Fonda was not dressed all frumpy and old?

---

The fact that JLo is FORTY FIVE and still has got what it takes: the looks and the body to pull off a dress like that. I'm from the "If You Got It, Flaunt It" school.

If you thought her dress was a tad overkill you didn't see her in the exotic green Versace silk chiffon dress with the plunging neckline that went down to her navel that she wore to the Grammys about 15 years ago...now THAT was pushing the envelope....but I dare say she pulled it off.

Apparently Geri Halliwell was the one pushing the envelope...

^ Exactly the comment I was referring to with age just being a number. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

---

@Carlos... I totally agree with you. I just did not like it. Especially when she was presenting. It almost felt like a set up to the Renner Globes line. ( maybe as a set up for that queen to act like a straight man.. but still a set up)

---

I'm especially happy for Joanne Froggart (!), Matt Bomer, (!!) Eddie Redmayne, and Kevin Spacey! Some fantastic performances this year on film and TV. I was surprised by some of the wins ("Grand Budapest Hote," Amy Adams, Ruth Wilson), but nothing too upsetting. I was thinking Emily Blunt was going to win and was surprised that Amy Adams has now won twice in the same category (back to back!), but I think Adams is one of the best actors we have out there. Some great speeches this year too, especially Jeffrey Tambor and Gina Rodriguez!

I am a little miffed with Julianne Moore's success this year, but not because of her. While I adore her as an actress and I am glad that she is receiving award recognition finally, I am upset because her film isn't playing anywhere. All of the other nominees were in mainstream movies that the general public had the chance to see and not just the industry and voters. I love her, but I'd love the chance to see her movie. (Side note: Jennifer Anniston, Reese Witherspoon, and Felicity Jones were also great this year, so she is in fantastic company!)

I have some unpopular opinions this year (I liked Keira Knightley more than Patricia Arquette, "Boyhood" was not nearly as good as the hype made it seem), but I feel like the four man acting categories and Best Picture are all locks and it's making for a boring award season. I feel like we all know: JK Simmons, Patricia Arquette, Eddie Redmayne, Julianne Moore, "Boyhood." Not all my personal choices, but I wish it was a little more competitive!

---

Voters and Sag members have been able to see screenings and a digital legal download of the film.

---