Not worthy of the Golden Globe awards.

Wooow, really?

I watched a whole different show with the same name then because i thought it was really good, it takes maybe afew minutes to grab you but once it does it's fantastic with really good performances.
Maybe They needed an actor with more prescence and more mature for Pine but it was compensated by Hugh Laurie who is really charming and you see why some people wanted to be around Roper he definitely gave you that vibe of someone you wouldn't want as your enemy but loved as a friend.

Angela Burr would have been better as a men too, someone more impossing but I guess Olivia gave this some realism to the series, except her and Corky everyone looked very polished so i think her casting was fine.

Yeah, Hugh just did a repeat of his House character: very intelligent and sarcastic with leadership attributes

I found it fascinating, kept my interest right from the start. Tom Hiddleton has a star quality. When he's on screen he captivates the viewer. It was only 6 episodes so we didnt have the time to know the characters better but Pine was not only a hotel manager that became an agent, he was a former soldier in Iraq, with an agent father. So, it's not that he came out of the blue. I found Hugh Laurie smaller than circumstances. He had a foxy look in his eyes, he was arrogant and ironic, just like House and that's all

I'm glad someone else agrees. To a degree. At best, an award for the opening credits and the scene with "Angela Burr," ("Corkoran" was noteworthy and "Joel Steadman" likeable), but it tried too obviously to be Casino Royal and it's as if they phoned it in or something, conjuring old characters or PR images without much thought or care. Pisses me off such half assedness gets rewarded, but the GG's have officially lost all credibility for me. Really? They thought that was the best of 2016? Such an insult to the profession and other actors of the year. Seriously. Think about it. This is what they consider the height of excellence. These are what tower over all other performances, mentioned and not mentioned, of 2016.

Totally agree. Can't believe it won any acting award, let alone three. Hugh Laurie is a brilliant actor, but I don't the camera stayed on him until the end of even one of his dialogues. And the dryness of the plot made the whole thing worse.

I am sure many worse shows have won Golden Globes?

What does HFP mean in this context?

I actually found Colman and Laurie really good, but I agree that Tom Hiddleston didn't deserve the award.

I get that he wasn't supposed to be Loki - he was supposed to be a man people underestimated and didn't take notice of. The characters (the bad guys, anyway) weren't meant to realize his underlying strength and toughness; but the problem was the audience didn't see it either.
Hiddleston took the "Pine acting weak" bit too far, making it impossible to believe in him as a former soldier. There should have been much more intensity and charisma when he showed his "true face", but he was just timid and dull. When he was in fights, killing etc it just seem believable.


There's no way he would have gotten the GG if it wasn't for his US fame as Loki.

-----------------------
"The best fairytale is one where you believe the people" -Irvin Kershner

Susanne Bier is one of my favourite filmmakers. I think the sooner she gets away from such TV series and back to film , the better . I thought this series, despite a lot of hype & promotion, was very ordinary indeed. Apart from some nice cinematography and the always reliable performance of Olivia Coleman, the rest was just so hum drum. Perhaps the material from Le Carre's book needed some better adaptation ? Bier perhaps should have engaged her usual great screenwriter collaborator in Anders Thomas Jenson to improve the script ? And the performances of Hiddleston & Lawrie were just clichéd caricatures of the "goodie & the baddie" who bored me by episode 3. For me , I would have given the Golden Globes to " The Night Of" with John Turturro & Riz Ahmed vying for the acting awards.