The 74th Golden Globe Awards, with it's infamous red carpet and heavy trophies, will begin in two days.
But the awards ceremony actually announced its first set of winners back in November.
Miss Golden Globe 2017.
Now, you would be forgiven for not knowing what 'Miss Golden Globe' even was.
But, you'll likely know the families from which the Miss Golden Globes have been heralded.
The title goes, traditionally, to one young actress, whose duties include handing out awards, shuffling drunk winners off the stage and, to be honest, mostly standing around and looking youthful, polished and beautiful.
In the early 1970s, a new rule was laid out, outlining that Miss Golden Globe 'needed' to be from the loins of Hollywood royalty.
That meant one, but preferably two, famous actor parents.
Since then, the position has been filled with various star's offspring.
Clint Eastwood has had two daughters, from different partners, honoured with the role.
Tippi Hedren's daughter Melanie Griffith was 1975's Miss Golden Globe, and her own daughter, Dakota Johnson, was 2006's.
One must suppose Stella Banderas is waiting for her invitation.
The Awards ceremony applied some gender equality to the position (not that it's paid) by letting Michael J Fox's son, Sam Michael Fox, Lorenzo Lamas' son, A J Lamas and Freddie Prinze's son, Freddie Prinze Jr have a go at being Mr Golden Globes.
There have been a handful of Miss Golden Globes who are of colour, like Jamie Foxx's daughter, Corinne Foxx, but they are few and far between.
Essentially, we see the same thing, year in, year out; the young, rich and famous-by-default get shimmied into the limelight and along with it, hollywood jobs, big-bucks contracts and worldwide visibility.
Remember, last year 18.5 million people watched it in the U.S. alone.
So this year, the Golden Globes announced an innovative choice for Miss Golden Globes.
Instead of a superstar's stunning daughter, they chose three.
Scarlet, Sistine and Sophia Stallone, daughters of - well you can figure it out.
Now, putting aside the out-dated and tacky 'glamourous assistant' overtones, giving such a useful and visible position to the same, privileged quota of people seems like an ugly hangover from a bygone era.
Apart from this, the awards ceremony does seem to have taken some heed to last year's #OscarsSoWhite controversy.
Ruth Negga is nominated for Best Performance By an Actress in a Motion Picture, Drama.
Mahershala Ali is up against Dev Patel, amongst others, for Best Performance By an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Motion Picture.
Viola Davis, Naomie Harris and Octavia Spencer are all nominated for Best Performance by Actress in a Supporting Role in a Motion Picture.
Riz Ahmed is up for Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role in a Series, Limited Series, or Motion Picture Made for Television.
Thankfully, the list actually does go on.
The talent is there, but unfortunately the stats still paint a depressing picture.
Both USC's study, 'Inclusion or Invisibility: The Comprehensive Annenberg Report on Diversity' ' and ULCA's study,'2016 Hollywood Diversity Report: Busine$$ as Usual?' show that Hollywood, both in front and behind the screen, is still far from diverse.
The UCLA study found:
- There were 2 males to every 1 female on screen
- Of characters over 40, men filled 74.3% of these roles and women 25.7%- Females were more likely than males to be shown in sexy attire (Females=34.3% vs. Males=7.6%), with some nudity (Females=33.4% vs. Males=10.8%) and physically attractive (Females=11.6% vs. Males=3.5%).
- Only 28.3% of all speaking characters were from an ethnic minority.
Considering the majority or writers and directors, or 'Gatekeepers' as some call them, are white men, this may not be a surprise.
But, they should know, it makes financial sense to diversity your film.
Take the most recent Star Wars film, whose $16.67 million Thursday gross is the 23rd-biggest in history, according to Forbes.
I think studios need to step up and be aware of the need to make films, not just having actors that represent the population but writers, directors and crew members that do.
I think it's good business.
I think the movies will get better, the stories will get stronger and audiences will respond bigger and that's good for the bottom line.'
So, if there's a role that promotes an unknown, puts them in the limelight, as well as in direct contact with Directors, Actors and Writers alike, why is it being consistently given to the most privileged?
Since the Golden Globes are so set on having an archaic, glorified magician's assistant herding drunk actors around a stage, they should make Miss Golden Globe a truly innovative and exciting position to help promote a diverse Hollywood.
Oh, and they should change the name, it's not a beauty pageant.