1988- Who Came In Second?

Home // Forums // Movies // 1988- Who Came In Second?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
Created
2 years ago
Last Reply
2 years ago
19
replies
600
views
12
users
4
3
2
  • Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210646

    Best Picture: A fairly hard one to guess! On paper, you’d think Mississippi Burning, but the controversy clearly derailed it’s chances.  The Accidental Tourist is too small of a film for voters to honor. I’d say Dangerous Liasions despite the Director snub given how great of a film it is, but Working Girl overperformed with the nominations that year so  it could have been second. I honestly really don’t know. 

    Best Director: Another mystery to me, but I’ll say Nichols.  

    Best Actor: Hanks, he probably was considered too new at that point to win over Hoffman, but I bet he came in second over Hoffman who was a sure thing.

    Best Actress: Close, who most predicted to triumph that year. She most likely lost due to how likeable Foster was at the time and the fact that her character is a man hating, manipulative villian(Same reason Pike was never as strong of a contender as she should have been last year). 

    Best Supporting Actor: Landau.  Kline is quite a scene stealer and the Academy clearly liked the film. 

    Best Supporting Actress:  Weaver.   Her loss was definitely humiliating for her given she was the first double nominee to lose, but she definitely wasn’t the last so she can reconcile herself with that. Davis most likely won due to wealth spreading as well as the size of her role. She can be considered a co-lead, something none of the rest of the contenders can say. 

    Best Original Screenplay: A Fish Called Wanda. If there were ten nominees, this film would definitely have made it in.   

    Best Adapted Screenplay:  The Accidental Tourist.    

    What do you think?  

    Reply
    Madson Melo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 25th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210648

    Working Girl / Dangerous Liasions

    Mike Nichols

    Gene Hackman

    Melanie Griffith or Glenn Close

    Landau or Stockwell

    Weaver

    ReplyCopy URL
    OnTheAisle
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210649

    What a wacky year!

    Best Picture winner Rain Man led nominations with eight.

    Both Best Picture nominees Dangerous Liaisons and Mississippi Burning had seven nominations apiece. Dangerous Liaisons won three including script but missed Director and Best Actor. MB missed a writing nomination as well.

    Working Girl had six but no nominations for Best Actor, writing or the technical categories. The Accidental Tourist had four nominations and missed on Director, Best Actor and Best Actress.

    Each film was subject to criticism. Mississippi Burning was considered offensive by some for implying white people were the reason for the success of the Civil Rights movement.  Dangerous Liaisons was considered by some to be too cold and viseral. Working Girl was thought to be too cute by some, despite its brilliant, ironic final shot. The Accidental Tourist was considered an accidental Best Picture nominee.

    I believe Rain Man won by a wide margin. I suspect the none of the other four Best Picture nominees gathered broad support. Mississippi Burning, Working Girl and The Accidental Tourist each won one Oscar. Dangerous Liaisons had three (two were for costumes and art direction – easy wins for a period piece with a good budget), and without a Best Director nomination it is hard to think it came in second.

    Due to being a star of Best Picture nominee and 17 years since his first win, I think the well respected Gene Hackman came in second for Best Actor. He would win on his next Oscar bid.

    Due to being a star of Best Picture nominee and coming off the widely respected Jonathan Demme film but ignored by the Academy for being “too hip” Something Wild, I think the daughter of Tippi Hedren, Melanie Griffith,  came in second for Best Actress. Her line, “I have a head for business and a bod for sin. Is there anything wrong with that?” was equivalent in popular culture with Dustin Hoffman’s repeated references to Judge Wapner and the People’s Court.

    I agree SIgourney Weaver from Working Girl came in second for supporting actress but believe that River Phoenix as the talented budding musician on the run with his fugitive parents was widely respected in Running on Empty, a drama with an Oscar nominated screen play by Naomi Foner, mother of Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal.

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210650

    The only one I can confidently say was “second” is Gene Hackman.

    River Phoenix gave my favorite perf that year, in what I consider to be an unforgettable film. And for me, Christine Lahti deserved to be there as well.  But that was a tough line up in both Lead and Supporting.

    Melanie is adorable and transformative in Working Girl and she may have been second. But Glenn is right there with her.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210651

    I know Melanie was popular, but I really don’t want to think that she got more votes then Glenn, lol. Besides Cusack and Weaver(Who aren’t particularly amazing, but not bad), the film Working Girl has to be one of the dullest comedies  ever nominated by the Academy and Griffith falls right into that. It was Glenn’s fifth nomination and her performance is superb.   

    I really enjoyed M.B actually and think it would have been a deserving winner, along  Dangerous Liasions.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    OnTheAisle
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210652

    I know Melanie was popular, but I really don’t want to think that she got more votes then Glenn, lol. Besides Cusack and Weaver(Who aren’t particularly amazing, but not bad), the film Working Girl has to be one of the dullest comedies  ever nominated by the Academy and Griffith falls right into that. It was Glenn’s fifth nomination and her performance is superb.   

    The only one I can confidently say was “second” is Gene Hackman.

    Melanie is adorable and transformative in Working Girl and she may have been second. But Glenn is right there with her.

    Glenn Close is the only living actress who has six or more Oscar nominations for acting but not a win. We all want Glenn Close to have an Oscar. I am not sure that allows us not to use a critical eye when looking at the past races.

    Close entered the Best Actress ceremony in 1988 with no wins from critics’ organizations and no Golden Globe nomination. Dangerous Liaisons was respected but not overtly celebrated as the best of the year. It was more highly regarded in Europe where it won prizes and Close was a nominee at BAFTA.

    I think Close was also hindered by her costar. Michelle Pfeiffer was red hot. She not only had a Best Supporting Actress nomination for Dangerous Liaisons, she was the star of two other nominated box office hits. If an Oscar was going to a player in Dangerous Liaisons, it was probably going to be Pfeiffer.

    On the other side, Griffith was entering the ceremony with a Golden Globe win, a runner up for the New York Film Critics Circle Best Actress (the prize went to Streep), a BAFTA nominee, and the star of a box office smash. Working Girl made over a $100 million compared to Dangerous Liaisons‘s respectable $34 million. Griffith was also a sentimental favorite having recently reunited with her first husband Don Johnson who was then starring in the hit series Miami Vice. The ceremony even featured the couple when presenting the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress where the conventional thinking was that Griffith’s Working GIrl costar would prevail but didn’t.

    Personally, I think Dangerous Liaisons is probably Close’s finest hour as an actress so far. It just wasn’t that celebrated in 1988.

    Look at Roger Ebert’s summary of the performances in his three star review, “It is played to perfection by Close and Malkovich in the central roles; their arch dialogues together turn into exhausting conversational games, tennis matches of the soul. The other key roles, played by Pfeiffer and Thurman, are trickier, because they involve characters who should not be entirely aware of what is really happening. Both actresses are well cast for their roles, and for Pfeiffer, in a year that has seen her in varied assignments such as Married to the Mob and Tequila Sunrise the movie is more evidence of her versatility. She is good when she is innocent and superb when she is guilty.”

    Griffith was revered.

    Look at this quote from Ebert’s four star review “This is Melanie Griffith’s movie in the same way The Graduate belonged to Dustin Hoffman. She was not an obvious casting choice, but she is the right one. And in an odd way, her two most famous previous roles, in Body Double and Something Wild, work for her. Because we may remember her from those sex-drenched roles, there is a way in which both Griffith and her character are both trying to get respectable – to assimilate everything that goes along with ‘serious hair’.”

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210653

    I refuse to accept it, lol. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Eddy Q
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210654

    I expect Close may have benefitted from being overdue even then, but then hindered by a lack of critics awards (a real shame imo) as well as longish stretches of time off-screen in the film – though she is certainly a lead, no doubt about it. (This also might have hurt Viola Davis in The Help, which some consider supporting – not me though.)

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210655

    [quote=”SammyPollock”]

    I know Melanie was popular, but I really don’t want to think that she got more votes then Glenn, lol. Besides Cusack and Weaver(Who aren’t particularly amazing, but not bad), the film Working Girl has to be one of the dullest comedies  ever nominated by the Academy and Griffith falls right into that. It was Glenn’s fifth nomination and her performance is superb.   

    The only one I can confidently say was “second” is Gene Hackman.

    Melanie is adorable and transformative in Working Girl and she may have been second. But Glenn is right there with her.

    Glenn Close is the only living actress who has six or more Oscar nominations for acting but not a win. We all want Glenn Close to have an Oscar. I am not sure that allows us not to use a critical eye when looking at the past races.

    Close entered the Best Actress ceremony in 1988 with no wins from critics’ organizations and no Golden Globe nomination. Dangerous Liaisons was respected but not overtly celebrated as the best of the year. It was more highly regarded in Europe where it won prizes and Close was a nominee at BAFTA.

    I think Close was also hindered by her costar. Michelle Pfeiffer was red hot. She not only had a Best Supporting Actress nomination for Dangerous Liaisons, she was the star of two other nominated box office hits. If an Oscar was going to a player in Dangerous Liaisons, it was probably going to be Pfeiffer.

    On the other side, Griffith was entering the ceremony with a Golden Globe win, a runner up for the New York Film Critics Circle Best Actress (the prize went to Streep), a BAFTA nominee, and the star of a box office smash. Working Girl made over a $100 million compared to Dangerous Liaisons‘s respectable $34 million. Griffith was also a sentimental favorite having recently reunited with her first husband Don Johnson who was then starring in the hit series Miami Vice. The ceremony even featured the couple when presenting the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress where the conventional thinking was that Griffith’s Working GIrl costar would prevail but didn’t.

    Personally, I think Dangerous Liaisons is probably Close’s finest hour as an actress so far. It just wasn’t that celebrated in 1988.

    Look at Roger Ebert’s summary of the performances in his three star review, “It is played to perfection by Close and Malkovich in the central roles; their arch dialogues together turn into exhausting conversational games, tennis matches of the soul. The other key roles, played by Pfeiffer and Thurman, are trickier, because they involve characters who should not be entirely aware of what is really happening. Both actresses are well cast for their roles, and for Pfeiffer, in a year that has seen her in varied assignments such as Married to the Mob and Tequila Sunrise the movie is more evidence of her versatility. She is good when she is innocent and superb when she is guilty.”

    Griffith was revered.

    Look at this quote from Ebert’s four star review “This is Melanie Griffith’s movie in the same way The Graduate belonged to Dustin Hoffman. She was not an obvious casting choice, but she is the right one. And in an odd way, her two most famous previous roles, in Body Double and Something Wild, work for her. Because we may remember her from those sex-drenched roles, there is a way in which both Griffith and her character are both trying to get respectable – to assimilate everything that goes along with ‘serious hair’.”

    [/quote]

     

    Yes. But, she has “a head for business and a bod for sin…anything wrong with that?”

    No Melanie, no. One of my all-time favorite lines. And the way she delivers it.

    I still cant fathom why Close missed the nod for Reversal of Fortune.  Not enough buzz I suppose. I found her just as intriguing as Jeremy Iron’s “Claus”.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210656

    All I can say is I hope she’ll get revenge on the Academy somehow.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Baby Clyde
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 8th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210657

    I know Melanie was popular, but I really don’t want to think that she got more votes then Glenn, lol. Besides Cusack and Weaver(Who aren’t particularly amazing, but not bad), the film Working Girl has to be one of the dullest comedies  ever nominated by the Academy and Griffith falls right into that. It was Glenn’s fifth nomination and her performance is superb.  

    Working Girl is amazing. It could easily have been a Capra or Sturges comedy from the 40’s starring Jean Arthur, Cary Grant, Joan Crawford and Eve Arden. Brilliant film.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210658

    I just can’t agree- the film could have been very entertaining, but to me was devoid of life and Griffith is flat and lifeless to me, not to mention her voice is quite grating. I do love that iconic line though. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    BamaEd
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 3rd, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210659

    Picture:
    1. Rain Man
    2. Dangerous Liaisons
    3. Mississippi Burning
    4. Working Girl
    5. Accidental Tourist
    I think the screenplay win shows more love for DL, especially since only AT had a nomination.

    Actor:
    1. Hoffman
    2. Hanks
    3. Hackman
    4. Olmos
    5. von Sydow
    Close between Hanks & Hackman, but Hanks was a rising star bringing heart to a “silly” role.

    Actress:
    1. Foster
    2. Close
    3. Griffith
    4. Streep
    5. Weaver
    Probably the closest category. A case can be made for all 5 women. Close gets the edge because of the overdue factor. But Griffith being a Hollywood legacy in a popular movie could have helped.

    Supporting Actor:
    1. Kline
    2. Stockwell
    3. Phoenix
    4. Landau
    5. Guiness
    This was a toss up. Phoenix was an up and comer in a very heralded performance, but Stockwell’s child star past and critics wins should have propelled him to 2nd.

    Supporting Actress:
    1. Davis
    2. Weaver
    3. Pfeiffer
    4. McDormand
    5. Cusack
    This was supposedly Weaver’s to lose. Davis’ win was a big shock. I think Weaver was easily 2nd. I thought Pfeiffer would have been 2nd to Weaver.

    Director:
    1. Levinson
    2. Nichols
    3. Parker
    4. Crichton
    5. Scorsese
    Tough call. I think Levinson won big but for 2nd, do you go popular well made comedy? Socially conscious drama? Farce? Or controversial? I think Nichols took silver. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Andrew Carden
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 16th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210660

    I suspect…

    “Dangerous Liaisons”
    Martin Scorsese
    Tom Hanks
    Glenn Close
    Martin Landau
    Sigourney Weaver (considering she was thought to be a total shoo-in going into Oscar night)

    ReplyCopy URL
    RobertPius
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 22nd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #210661

    The LA Times picked Close as the frontrunner. (I used to save clippings as a teen  and I remember this one.)

    Other outlets were picking Foster or Griffith and some Close. There really wasn’t a strong front runner but I think that Close had just lost the year before for Fatal Attraction made people lean towards her. 

    The story on Weaver’s loss was supposedly that Gorillas in the Mist was so aggresive in their campaiging that it became a joke that you couldn’t open your mailbox without having a picture of Sigourney Weaver and a baby gorilla fall out.  Supposedly this annoyed people and the theory was Weaver suffered in the supporting category because of a backlash.

    This was a year where 3 of the 4 acting nominees were surprises. Exciting year! (plus it was also the Rob Lowe/Snow White year!) 

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
Reply To: 1988- Who Came In Second?

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
Freeman... - Aug 20, 2017
Movies
Emil Pe... - Aug 20, 2017
Movies