Dangerous Liaisons At The Oscars

Home // Forums // Movies // Dangerous Liaisons At The Oscars

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
Created
3 years ago
Last Reply
3 years ago
15
replies
696
views
14
users
2
1
1
  • Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162064

    This a great movie that deserved more recognition, even if it is a little slow.    I think Malkovich should have been nominated and  as I’ve said before, Close is my choice for Best Actress that year.  Although I originally disliked Pheiffer’s work, my understanding of the character from reading the play  had changed enough that I could see her performance in a different light.  It’s very strong work from her,  although I do think she could have found even more subtlety and layers  in the role.  She’s my supporting actress pick too, even without seeing The Accidental Tourist in its entiriety.  I think Frears should have been nominated  for Director and it also deserved  Best Picture from the nominees I’ve seen.    What are your thoughts?  

    P.S:  The play is amazing!  I read it because I’m working on a monologue from it,  and its truly exceptional!  Read it if you can!  

    Reply
    KyleBailey
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162066

    Yeah I watched this for the first time a few months ago and I’m not usually into those period piece movies but I loved this movie. I thought Malkovich should have been nominated, Close and Pheiffer should have won and honestly I loved the movie more than Rain Man so it would have been my pick for Best Picture too 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Beau S.
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162067

    It’s my pick for Picture and Director, and all of the performances are pitch-perfect, though none of them are my personal winners. I would have nominated Malkovich, Close, Pfeiffer and Thurman.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Indonesian
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 1st, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162068

    i absolutely love this movie!
    Close DESERVED to win that fuckin oscar 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Eddy Q
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162069

    This is probably my second favourite Frears film after The Grifters. It would’ve made a more deserving BP winner than Rain Man, which superficially used autism as a template for a conventional road movie about brotherly love. Glenn Close has a richer role here than her undeniably impressive work in Fatal Attraction, and would’ve got my vote (Streep is equally deserving in A Cry in the Dark, but she already had two at the time so I’ll go with Close.) I actually think the Academy were right to not nominate Malkovich – he’s good in the first half, but overplays in the second, which doesn’t stand up to Close’s Machiavellian charm (but in a way this might be appropriate for the narrative).

    Best films of 1988? Distant Voices, Still Lives and Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Cheshire
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 16th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162070

    Other than Keanu Reeves looking and being out of place, I have nothing bad to say about Dangerous Liaisons.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Baby Clyde
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 8th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162071

    One of my all time favourite films.

    I would hve given wins Frears, Close & Malkovich as well as Best Picture.

    ReplyCopy URL
    zordon
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 16th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162072

    i absolutely love this movie!
    Close DESERVED to win that fuckin oscar 

    You’re so right about Close! And Malkovich was equally fantastic (how ridiculous he wasn’t even nominated?)
    And I LOVE the movie too, of course. I remember being surprised how cinematic it was. Frears and Hampton did such a great job with adapting the play. For me it’s the best effort in their respective careers. 

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162073

    I was just reading Tom’s  Movie Awards  book and I was shocked to see that Dangerous Liasons won no critics awards and  was COMPLETELY shut out at the globes with no nominations AT ALL.  I was also further  surprised how little the critics awards overlapped with the Oscars that year.   Out of the winners in the top 8 categories, only Foster had  won a critics award,  The G.Gs honored Rain Man, Hoffman and Foster though.  Although there wasn’t as much overlap  with the critics and the Oscars  back then as there are now,  it seems so odd to me that none of the winners were able to do  win more critics prizes at the time.  

    Also,  since Close had won nothing and was snubbed at the Globes, why do you guys think was she perceived to be the frontrunner?  Everyone else had won something:  Foster won the Globe and the National Board Of Review Award, Griffith won the Globe,  Weaver won the Globe in a three way tie with Foster and unnominated Shirley Maclaine, and Streep took home the New York Film Critics Circle Award.   

    ReplyCopy URL
    marcelo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 24th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162074

    Wonderful movie. The best of 1988. Deserved Best Picture, Director, Supporting Actress (Pfeiffer), Adapted Screenplay (won), Cinematography, Art Direction (won) and Costume (won)

    ReplyCopy URL
    montana82
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162075

    Does anyone know who was the favorite to win Best Actress that night?

    Glenn Close and Melanie Griffith were in movies nominated for Best Picture and Director.  Foster was her films sole nomination.

    Griffith won the Comedy Globe and Weaver, Foster, and unnominated MacLaine 3 way tied for Drama.

    Close wasn’t even up for a Globe but was on nomination #5 in 6 years.

    Seems odd if Foster was the frontrunner.  Was she expected to win?

    ReplyCopy URL
    Robert Russaw
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 6th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162076

    If memory serves me correctly, Dangerous Liaisons was not screened in time for the Hollywood Foreign Press, which is why it did not receive any nominations that year.    

    The favorites to win Best Actress that year were Close and Foster.   Many thought Close, on her fifth nomination was the favorite to win, but many also thought Foster would win because she was playing more of a sympathetic role.     This was a situation where it was rare that an actress with the film’s sole nomination (Foster) would win when up against a competitor (Close) whose movie had much more support.   Ultimately, though it was in the nature of the roles where Foster prevailed. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Vincent Yeoh (aka Vinny)
    Member
    Joined:
    Nov 6th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162077

    I was just reading Tom’s  Movie Awards  book and I was shocked to see that Dangerous Liasons won no critics awards and  was COMPLETELY shut out at the globes with no nominations AT ALL.  I was also further  surprised how little the critics awards overlapped with the Oscars that year.   Out of the winners in the top 8 categories, only Foster had  won a critics award,  The G.Gs honored Rain Man, Hoffman and Foster though.  Although there wasn’t as much overlap  with the critics and the Oscars  back then as there are now,  it seems so odd to me that none of the winners were able to do  win more critics prizes at the time.  

    Also,  since Close had won nothing and was snubbed at the Globes, why do you guys think was she perceived to be the frontrunner?  Everyone else had won something:  Foster won the Globe and the National Board Of Review Award, Griffith won the Globe,  Weaver won the Globe in a three way tie with Foster and unnominated Shirley Maclaine, and Streep took home the New York Film Critics Circle Award.   

    As far as the Oscars were concerned, Close had already been nominated four times before and was considered due. It was a delicious role in the kind of period movie the Oscars love. 
    My guess as to why Close was not nominated in the GGs and Critics’ awards could be because the role, while considered lead, was onscreen only about half of the movie. That should not have been a problem, but i guess that could be the reason it was overlooked.
     

    ReplyCopy URL
    BTN
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162078

    Frears was robbed of a nomination. Close robbed of the win. I would’ve nominated Mildred Natwick! “What’s true of most men is doubly so of him”. Great dialogue throughout. Tense direction- “war”

    ReplyCopy URL
    RobertPius
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 22nd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #162079

    1988 was an interesting Oscar year for the acting categories. You had both supporting winners being out and out shocking upsets and then Jodie Foster a slight shock for lead actress.

    I don’t know if any other year had that many surprise acting winners. 

     

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
Reply To: Dangerous Liaisons At The Oscars

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

Similar Topics
SN - Aug 20, 2017
Movies
Freeman... - Aug 20, 2017
Movies