Was George Clooney the best dressed man at the 2012 Golden Globes on Sunday night? He was up against some pretty stiff competition, including Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, and more—but boy, did he look good!
According to a report from Celebuzz, Clooney was just one of several gentlemen vying for the title of Best Dressed Man at the Golden Globe Awards. In addition to Pitt and DiCaprio, other contenders include Michael Fassbender, Chris Colfer (now come on—how could he remotely compete with George?), Ewan McGregor, Matthew Morrison, Gerard Butler, Mark Wahlberg, and Colin Firth. Of course, as everyone knows, "best dressed" is typically translated into "best looking." You be the judge.
So how do you think George fared? Fassbender, Morrison, and Colfer can likely be ruled out right away. While Fassbender and Morrison did in fact look handsome, they are no competition whatsoever for George Clooney. Chris Colfer, while a very talented young man, should not be in a competition with the likes of Clooney, Wahlberg, DiCaprio, and Butler. No way. No how.
Who would you eliminate next? Leonardo DiCaprio is well-loved, but when put next to Clooney doesn't really stand a chance. Colin Firth doesn't quite make the grade, nor does Wahlberg, when push finally comes to shove.
That leaves Clooney, Brad Pitt, and Gerard Butler in hot and heavy competition for the best dressed man at the 2012 Golden Globes.
Of these three, which one would you choose to win this best dressed honor? All three are handsome. All three exude the utmost in style.
Okay, as push comes to shove, Brad Pitt can be x-ed out for his long hair. Handsome guy, but he looks like an idiot with that long hair. That leaves Clooney and Butler. Now that poses a problem.
Seems like you'll have to decide.
Do you think George Clooney or Gerard Butler should be named the best dressed (i.e. best looking!) man of the 2012 Golden Globes?
Photo Source: Facebook
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 9
Would you kindy explain the reasons behind these poorly phrased and frankly offensive words:
"Chris Colfer (now come on—how could he remotely compete with George?)"
and
"Chris Colfer, while a very talented young man, should not be in a competition with the likes of Clooney, Wahlberg, DiCaprio, and Butler. No way. No how."
Why is it such a stretch to imagine that Chris Colfer is just as attractive as George Clooney, Wahlberg and co.? Is it because he doesn't fit the (American) standard of traditional masculine beauty?
Is it because he is gay, therefore unable to appear attractive to straight females? Why was he singled out and why were such disparaging words used? Repeatedly denying his physical appeal while the other hetersexual men were partly praised.
Your article makes you sound homophobic and effeminophobic.
We all have our preferences and attractiveness is subjective but I would have expected a more professional sounding article. A single sentence, e.g. in my opinion Chris Colfer isn't as attractive as George would have been more than enough.
And you couldn't have been more obvious about your bias towards George Clooney, could you?
This couldn't be farther from the truth. The comment about Chris not fitting in with the other men in the category would be the same had Justin Bieber been there, too. There was a very definite separation of boys vs. men. Sexual orientation was not a factor.
And yes, the entire gist of the piece was intended to be biased toward Clooney.