The past 48 hours have represented a whirlwind of controversy surrounding Ricky Gervais and the jokes he told at Sunday night’s Golden Globe Awards. At first the publicity machine was shooting out rumors that the Hollywood Foreign Press were so angry with Gervais that they were not inviting him back to host, and would ban all his films from ever being nominated.
Naturally that was rubbish, and soon after the HFPA – as well as Gervais – began releasing statements. The HFPA, while they did not condone Gervais’ celeb bashing, said it was one of their best shows ever. Meanwhile, on his blog, Gervais had this to say: ''All the same conspiracy theories as last year too... ''So and so was offended''... ''hasn't been invited back yet''... exactly the same as last time. Paul McCartney was furious''... no he wasn't. And nor was Tim Allen and Tom Hanks. I was drinking with them after. Why do people have to embellish? They're allowed to say they hated it. They're allowed to say they didn't find it funny, that it was tasteless, over the top, or whatever. But why do they speculate and make stuff up?''They make stuff up because they like to create controversy, since controversy creates buzz and a larger readership. I personally thought Gervais was hilarious, and we imagine most of the celebs in attendance took his comments in stride.
What about you? Did you like Ricky Gervais as host? Was he too mean spirited, or did he give us just enough to hold our attention for three hours.
Sound off below!
