tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post4891844134511613017..comments2024-03-17T10:11:46.952-04:00Comments on Film Experience Blog: Monologue Monday "Annie"NATHANIEL Rhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-67037186601965399732008-01-15T17:35:00.000-05:002008-01-15T17:35:00.000-05:00It annoys me too that 'A Cry in the Dark' has now ...It annoys me too that 'A Cry in the Dark' has now been renamed 'Evil Angels' on imdb.com. I protested that, but they stuck to their guns.<BR/><BR/>Just because the film was called 'Evil Angels' in Australia, and it's supposedly an Australian film [yeah, right - $US for Meryl Streep in an Australian film in 1988].<BR/><BR/>If it were such an Australian film, they wouldn't have brought out the Hollywood big guns. The only reason it was called 'Evil Angels' there is because the book, upon which the film was based, was well-known there.Brian Tristam Williamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06929799166733961092noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-27588456210643106902007-03-06T17:19:00.000-05:002007-03-06T17:19:00.000-05:00maybe i should do '88 next in my retro awards.maybe i should do '88 next in my retro awards.NATHANIEL Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-10919091217338005792007-03-06T16:16:00.000-05:002007-03-06T16:16:00.000-05:00Vince, Evil Angels is an Aussie movie based on a b...Vince, Evil Angels is an Aussie movie based on a book of that name. It was called Evil Angels in Australia but they changed it to A Cry in the Dark for the States, not sure about other countries. Not sure why IMDB would revert from the US title though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-5106513670188175762007-03-06T14:00:00.000-05:002007-03-06T14:00:00.000-05:00Hey, Nate, I like that line-up. What about giving...Hey, Nate, I like that line-up. What about giving the fifth slot to La Pfeiffer for "Married to the Mob"? Actually, Jamie Lee Curtis was amazing in A "Fish Called Wanda," but some may deem that supporting (I'm not sure if I do).Cinesnatchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00244752542602944093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-47516894504402083872007-03-06T13:33:00.000-05:002007-03-06T13:33:00.000-05:00yeah, 88 was a great year for leading actresses. w...yeah, 88 was a great year for leading actresses. which makes jodie's win that much more frustrating. I prefer ALL of her other nominated performances. and by a significant margin.<BR/><BR/>my lineup woulda found room for:<BR/>LAHTI, STREEP, CLOSE and SARANDON<BR/>for sure with the fifth spot an all out war between several peoples unless i'm forgetting someone major.NATHANIEL Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-58102485186813871642007-03-06T02:55:00.000-05:002007-03-06T02:55:00.000-05:00Oh, sorry, Adam, you were talking about the Globes...Oh, sorry, Adam, you were talking about the Globes and not the Oscars. But, yeah, Griffith won the comedy category. <BR/><BR/>And funny thing about the dramatic Best Actress Globe that year, FYI ... there were THREE winners (more winners than losers) ...<BR/><BR/>Jodie Foster, The Accused<BR/>Sigourney Weaver, Gorillas<BR/>Shirley McClaine, Madam Sousatzka<BR/><BR/>Those who stayed in their seats ...<BR/>Christine Lahti, Running on Empty<BR/>Streep, A Cry in the Dark ... or "Evil Angels" as it's now known on the imdb ... what's up with that? (Originally it was supposed to be called "Guilty By Suspicion," which was eventually used for a DeNiro/Bening film about the 50's blacklist)<BR/><BR/>Okay, way too much information, sorry.Cinesnatchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00244752542602944093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-68757106588026655362007-03-06T02:49:00.000-05:002007-03-06T02:49:00.000-05:00Adam ~You're right, but it was movie year 1988. A...Adam ~<BR/><BR/>You're right, but it was movie year 1988. And, yes, you could have easily switched out Sarandon for Griffith. In fact, I remember Roger Ebert saying that if Bull Durham had been released in December like Working Girl, it might have gotten more Oscar nods. (But then again, it was a baseball movie, and December would have been "off season" ... but, would that have mattered?)<BR/><BR/>But, Griffith was cute and she was the star of a Best Picture nominee. I wasn't crazy about Sigourney Weaver, but she hasn't had enough nom's as it is. Jodie Foster was Oscar bait, but still worth a nomination. I wouldn't dare touch Streep's Dingo Ate My Baby or Glenn Close's Dangerous Liaison.<BR/><BR/>So, yeah, that leaves Griffith's "I have a brain for business and a bod for sin." But, Sarandon got so many nom's afterward anyway, so ...Cinesnatchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00244752542602944093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-25364379645065814262007-03-05T19:13:00.000-05:002007-03-05T19:13:00.000-05:00I saw this a while back and wasn't sure why you lo...I saw this a while back and wasn't sure why you love it so. I thought it was a good movie, but nothing that special. And I wouldn't place Sarandon's work here on a par with <EM>Dead Man Walking</EM> and <EM>Thelma & Louise</EM>, but that's just me. To each his own. It was certainly a good idea for her to do it, though, cause without it she may not have even been able to do T & L and the rest of her 90's work.<BR/><BR/>I think she deserved the globe nom for this, and that's about it. 1987 was tough. Though I suppose she probably should've beaten Melanie Griffith to the globe. Wasn't that the same year?<BR/><BR/>I can't say for sure, though, cause I've not seen <EM>Working Girl</EM> and have no great desire to do so.adam k.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13485604493059621307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-84012235588447807882007-03-05T16:36:00.000-05:002007-03-05T16:36:00.000-05:00Oh my God, NO WAY OUT! Yes, that was a guilty ple...Oh my God, NO WAY OUT! Yes, that was a guilty pleasure of mine too. I first saw Sarandon in Witches of Eastwick. She really kicks ass in Bull Durham. It's funny how she got nominated for other performances and not this one, but 1988 was a really competitive year (for Best Actress).Cinesnatchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00244752542602944093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-35347838163885693072007-03-05T16:22:00.000-05:002007-03-05T16:22:00.000-05:00I love this movie. High time I saw it again. I was...I love this movie. High time I saw it again. I was 16 when it came out, taped it off the TV and watched it A LOT. Was my first real exposure to Sarandon, and even Costner was great in this (and the slick, but idiotic No Way Out of the previous year, a guilty pleasure in my younger years that I'd be embarrassed to see now - Sean Young, Will Patton as the creepy gay aide in love with Gene Hackman!, ugh).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-38739175594921997572007-03-05T13:59:00.000-05:002007-03-05T13:59:00.000-05:00Splendid. I was hoping Monologue Mondays would ret...Splendid. I was hoping Monologue Mondays would return. However, I disagree with Annie's assertion that baseball is never boring. I'd edit the line to say "Baseball in the movies is never boring."J.J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07815005929352267468noreply@blogger.com