Benutzerrezensionen

Meryl Streep was incredible in this film. She has an amazing knack for accents, and she shows incredible skill in this film overall. I really felt for her when Lindy was being persecuted. She was played realistically, too. She got cranky, upset, and unpleasant as the media and the government continued their unrelenting witchhunt. I didn't expect much from the film initially, but I really got interested in it, and the movie is based on a real person and real events. It turned out to be better than I had anticipated. Sam Neill was also outstanding; this is the best work I've seen from him, and I've really liked him in other movies (The Piano, for example). I gave the film a 7, but if I could rate just the acting, I'd give the it a 9.5, and a perfect 10 for Streep.

Excellent true-life drama from director and co-writer Fred Schepisi, adapting John Bryson's book "Evil Angels" with Robert Caswell, details the 1980 case of a nine-week-old baby allegedly carried off by a wild dingo at a camping site at Ayers Rock in the Northern territory of central Australia. The infant's parents, the Chamberlains, a Seventh-day Adventist pastor and his wife, cooperate with the authorities and give all the necessary print and television interviews--they, in fact, do everything asked of them--but their misunderstood religion coupled with Lindy Chamberlain's stoic demeanor turns the tide of public opinion against them, from sympathetic to vengeful. Everything about this private couple soon becomes suspect under the microscope, including the meaning of their child's name, Azaria, to the discovery of baby clothes in the Outback that had cuts on them but no teeth marks. Meryl Streep's riveting performance as Lindy is quite remarkable. This is a woman who hides the sadness in her eyes behind sunglasses, who has grieved until reaching a kind of jaded resolve--she quickly becomes as suspicious of the badgering legal and media figures as the public is of her. Schepisi's docudrama-styled take on the tragedy sweeping Australia is marvelously rendered, and all the performers, especially Sam Neill as husband Michael, do powerful work. A classy production from (surprise!) Golan-Globus and Cannon Entertainment resulted in a much-deserved Oscar nomination for Streep, affecting a realistic Aussie accent (no surprise there). *** from ****

"A Cry in the Dark" is a masterful piece of cinema, haunting, and incredibly though provoking. The true story of Lindy Chamberland, who, in 1980, witnessed a horrific sight, seeing her 3-month-old baby being brutally taken from their family's tent, while camping on the Austrailian outback. Azaria (the baby) was never seen again, and the result of her horrendous disappearance caused a true life frenzy all around the world. Meryl Streep does immaculate justice to the role of Lindy, as she always does. But the one thing that helps "A Cry in the Dark" never fall flat is the brilliant direction. A truly inspired and accurate outlook on this baffeling case, tears are brought to the eyes. The concept is nothing less then terrifying, and afterwards you are left haunted, but also inspired.

If there is any Australian that I feel sorrier for, it would have to be Lindy Chamberlain. Her compelling story is one of the more famous court cases in Australian history. Also known as ‘A cry in the dark', ‘Evil Angel' shows how divided the Australian public really were towards this case and how the media can manipulate a story, by favouring just one side of a story that they believe is the whole truth. When I hear the cry ‘The dingo's got my baby', it brings back memories from along time ago.

During a camping trip, an infant disappears from her family's tent. When the child's mother spies a dingo nearby, authorities launch a frantic search, but all they find is a torn, bloodied garment. The press, distressed by the mother's seeming "lack of emotion", and suspicious of her religious beliefs, begin to accuse her of murdering the baby. The sentiment against her begins to grow, and soon the whole continent is talking about the case. Despite the lack of evidence, the woman is imprisoned; although investigators eventually re-examine her story, the damage is done: the innocent mother's relationship with her husband has been irreparably destroyed. This is the documentary style film adaptation of the true story of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain.

This film has some truly amazing performance in it. Meryl Streep is a wonderful actress, but in this film she does so much that you just have to like. She really becomes ‘Lindy' and embodies what she actually went through. I remember reading that Streep had to have speaking classes, so she could sound ‘Australian', which she does very well. But it is her persona I like the most. Streep performance as Chamberlain is so flawless, as she shows no emotion when she is going in and out of court, which is what the real Lindy Chamberlain did. It is understandable that the general public would think that Lindy is guilty of murder, which is again testament to Streep's masterful performance. However in court Lindy is visibly upset, when she has to recall the night a dingo took her baby.

The other performance which is most noteworthy is that of Sam Neill. While Neill has gone on to do many big performances in Hollywood blockbusters such as ‘Jurassic Park' and the Aussie favourite ‘The Dish', this is one film I continue to remember him from. I like how we see that Michael is visibly distressed by the whole court case scenario, with him stumbling through the interrogation when he is on the stand. It is also most taxing on the couple's personal life, with Michael the first one to crack.

Yet there are some famous Australian cameos from many actors in ‘Evil Angel'. Look at these for names; Maurie Fields, Charles ‘Bud' Tingwell, John Howard, Frankie J. Holden, Mark Little, Mark Mitchell, Glenn Robbins and Kym Gyngell. All of them are well known personalities in Australian TV, and it is of great significance to this story to have such great fame among the cast of this film.

Director/Screenwriter of ‘Evil Angel' Fred Schepisi does justice to this story in many ways. Firstly, Schepisi and co screenwriter Robert Caswell stuck very close to the story written by John Bryson. Then Schepisi directs this film in quite a unique way. He points the story in many ways, showing the Chamberlain's in one shot, then to the media, then to the general public. This amount of change gives the film great variety, which is good. If it was fixated with just the Chamberlains, this movie could have had major problems.

I also like the many shots of Australia that this film shows off. Having this tragedy take place in the Northern territory, certainly gave that state and its famous attraction Ayers Rock (Uluru) some sort reputation, as this film does too. Yet there are some excellent shots in Alice Springs, Darwin and in the Chamberlain's home-town (for some time) of Mt. Isa in Queensland. This is good work of cinematographer Ian Baker.

So with all those factors taken into consideration, this film looks deep into what it must be like to go through the loss of a baby child, taken by a wild animal. It also a fascinating insight into what the media can do to turn a story and how merciless people can be towards someone that in all possibility could be ‘innocent'. Although it is 22 years since this horrible event has happened, I realise that Chamberlain's lives were, and probably never will be the same again. Michael and Lindy had to go through the most painful of divorces, and their children had to go grow up with a large amount of innuendo attached to their lives. I am thankful that Lindy Chamberlain was released from prison, after serving three and a half years of a life imprisonment sentence for a crime which she did not commit.

CMRS gives ‘Evil Angel': 4 (Very Good Film)

The facts in the case of an Australian couple persecuted by a headline-hungry press should be familiar to viewers of the CBS news show 60 Minutes, which aired the story (not coincidentally) just before this film was released. Both versions recount the disappearance during a weekend camping trip of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain's infant daughter, and the subsequent three-ring media circus which led to wild (and totally fabricated) accusations of cult fanaticism and ritual sacrifices, and eventually to a murder conviction for the bereaved mother. But the big screen dramatization has more in mind than just a strong reprimand for misguided journalism ethics. The reporters covering the case are shown to be more ferocious than the wild dingo dog claimed by the Chamberlain's to have killed their child, but the screenplay wisely implicates public opinion as well, which condemned Lindy Chamberlain to prison for not having a telegenic personality (the same trait might also lose her sympathy with moviegoers, despite another challenging performance by Meryl Streep). Director Fred Schepisi presents the story as a straightforward, undemonstrative docudrama, letting the cold-blooded courtroom drama speak for itself, with a pair of excellent actors (Streep and Sam Neill) taking up the slack.

Meryl Streep is such a genius. Well, at least as an actress. I know she's been made fun of for doing a lot of roles with accents, but she nails the accent every time. Her performance as Lindy Chamberlain was inspiring. Mrs. Chamberlain, as portrayed here, was not particularly likable, nor all that smart. But that just makes Streep's work all the more remarkable. I think she is worth all 10 or so of her Oscar nominations. About the film, well, there were a couple of interesting things. I don't know much about Australia, but the theme of religious bigotry among the general public played a big part in the story. I had largely missed this when I first saw the film some years ago, but it came through loud and clear yesterday. And it seems the Australian press is just as accomplished at misery-inducing pursuit and overkill as their American colleagues. A pretty good film. A bit different. Grade: B

Some movies seem to be made before we are ready for them. As I watched this film, made in 1988, in 1999, I thought I was watching the O.J. Simpson debacle (although I have very different opinions about the innocence of the individuals in each situation).

The Australian news media, if this movie is to be believed, devoured the case of a possible infanticide and truth was left as an afterthought. It was scary to see the scenes of invasive, swarming media hordes, ridiculous accounts of half-truths and lies and debates over the supposed merits of the case by persons at all levels of society.

Equally appalling is the media's depiction as indifferent and uncomprehending of the technical information in the case. I do wish more was made of the issue of religious prejudice in the case (the accused are Seven-Day Adventists).

Today these circuses have become common but that makes the lesson only more important.

Streep is excellent as usual, and this is the best I've ever seen Sam Neill. The Aussie accents get a bit thick at times but not incomprehensible.

I used to think "maybe the dingo ate your baby" was a funny joke, but after watching A Cry in the Dark, I'm not so sure anymore. As a parent, I was horrified by the events that unfolded on the screen, and realizing that they actually happened made it even more impactful. This is a tragic story portrayed on screen by talented actors who give it a sense of realism. I was also infuriated by how the public and the media twisted the story around and made the Chamberlains out to be the bad guys. That being said, the film is a little slow and repetitive, but this story will haunt my mind for a long time.

A contemporary, and classic, tale of injustice.

Evil Angels, aka A Cry in the Dark, depicts the famous case of Azaria Chamberlain, a baby killed by a dingo near Ayers Rock / Uluru in 1980. Due to the sensationalist, libelous and slanderous nature of the Australian media and the evidence-manufacturing abilities of the Northern Territory Police the mother of the baby, Lindy Chamberlain, was charged with the baby's murder.

What follows is a frustrating and harrowing ordeal, for the accused and for the viewer, as you are lead through the travesty that was the court case.

Many themes are covered, none of which show Australian society in a positive light. Shows just how despicable the Australian media are - sadly, they're even worse now (95% of what you see or read in Australian media is sensationalized bs). Shows the incompetence, even corruption, of Australia's police forces, particularly in the Northern Territory in the 1980s. Shows how the media can influence a trial, and how far-from-optimal the jury system is. How the jury reached a unanimous guilty verdict is beyond me.

Also shows how the media get the average yobbo caught up in someone else's affairs - the trial had nothing to do with them.

Great performance by Meryl Streep in the lead role. She totally nails the accent (which is more than one can say for most Hollywood actors faking an Australian accent) and seems immersed in the role. She well deserved her Oscar nomination.

Sam Neill is OK as Michael Chamberlain.

The bit-part Australian actors often leave a lot to be desired, however, overdoing the redneckness.

This is an extremely-powerful based-on-a-true story film that can be infuriating to watch. I say that because how brutal a hounding press can be to people, in this case an innocent Australian couple charged with killing their baby.

Meryl Streep received a lot of recognition for her performance when this film came out but I thought Sam Neill was just as good. Let's just say they both were excellent but the role was little harder for Streep because she had to learn an Australian accent. (She learned it so well I had trouble understanding her in parts.)

Without giving anything away, all I can say is this movie will wear you out emotionally.

Common sense tells us that "seeing is believing." Experience tells us that, when motivation is strong enough, it's the other way around -- "believing is seeing." Under pressure from the press and from public opinion, criminalists see blood where there is no blood. Forensic pathologists who have never see a dingo claim an absence of dingo teeth marks. Investigators see an arterial blood spray where there is nothing but a sound-deadening compound.

The case took place at a time when another of those episodes of collective hysteria was sweeping the English-speaking world. Satanic worshippers lurked in the most unlikely place and preschools were filled with pedophiles. Smokers endangered our health by subjecting us to whiffs of the burning weed. We seem to need an expression for our collective hatred. There's even evidence from gerontological studies that angry people tend to outlive more pacific individuals -- an effect the authors attributed to "the necessary enemy." Maybe now, after the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism, we'll have more palpable enemies than will o' the wisps.

The Chamberlains were caught up in that wave of collective hatred. The case must have been a dramatic one -- wild dog eats baby! One can imagine the headlines, the earnest discussions, the fixed conclusions based on presumptions. Lindy Chamberlain certainly did nothing to discourage the calumny heaped upon her. She wasn't very good at playing the victim, in contrast to, say, the Menendez brothers who slaughtered their parents, then wept on the stand while describing how abused they were, and wound up with a mistrial. And not nearly as good as Susan Smith, the woman in the unlikely town of Union, South Carolina, who drowned her two children and sobbed openly on TV while begging the mythical black kidnapper not to harm them.

Well, after all, occupying the role of victim is an acquired skill and some have acquired less of it than others. (Mersault, in Camus' "The Stranger.") Lindy Chamberlain, as expertly played here my Meryl Streep, a phenomenally talented technical actress, is not a likable person. She matter-of-factly whines on, complaining about things in a sing-song voice, punctuated by occasional outbursts of anger. She needed some coaching from the Menendez' on how to engage the jury's sympathy. And she LOOKS wrong too. She should be small and vulnerable, instead of lumpy. And she seems to have gone out of her way to look ill-groomed. Streep, properly glamorized, is a beautiful and intelligent-looking woman. As Lindy Chamberlain her eyebrows are plucked and then painted back in as mere smudges by the makeup department. Her black hair (which should have been blonde) was probably meant to be in a style called page boy (is that right?) but comes out looking more like a Nazi helmet. Streep must have put on weight for the role. Her arms and breasts are flabby and her neck seems the size of a telephone pole, reducing her lips to a tiny pink orifice in the middle of the vast featureless plane of her face. She's as unsympathetic as all get out and human nature being what it is, people are likely to get confused about the difference between being dislikable and being guilty of murder.

Sam Neill is far more sympathetic a character but, where Streep is arrogant, he's sensitive, muddled, and weak. He's completely discombobulated by the prosecution's series of questions: "Did she say she saw anything in the dingo's mouth? Did she say she didn't see anything in the dingo's mouth? Did she tell you she saw NOTHING in the dingo's mouth?" Confused, he answers that, yes, she told him she saw the dingo come out with the baby in her mouth.

Reminds me of an interrogation from "Catch-22", something like this. Superior officer to subordinate: "When did you say we were a bunch of fools?" Subordinate: "I never said you were fools." Superior: "Now you're telling me when you DIDN'T say it. I'm asking you when you DID say we were a bunch of fools." Subordinate: "I ALWAYS never say you were a bunch of fools."

It's a fast-paced movie. If there were any dissolves I missed them. The story comes to us in pointed scenes of the Chamberlains together, intercut with snippets of public reaction to the spectacle. But the movie, for all the tragedy inherent in the story, isn't gripping. It not only has no hero or heroine, there's no one who's particularly likable. Neill suffers in silence and Streep has almost done too good a job alienating us from her character and her anguish. But overall, whatever it lacks in emotional impact it more than makes up for in its instructive quality. And of course our sympathies are with the real-life Chamberlains who were put through an immeasurable ordeal. The press and the gossipy, half-hysterical public may be easy targets, but they're very real threats to our collective common sense.

Sam Neil and Meryl Streep play Michael and Lindy Chamberlain, a married couple who take a camping trip in outback Australia with their baby daughter Azaria, who one night goes missing, and only her bloody and torn clothing is recovered. Lindy is convinced that a native Dingo(a sort of wild dog) grabbed and killed Azaria, but the police and public don't believe her, since they never heard of such behavior by a dingo, and so the Chamberlains find themselves arrested and charged with their daughter's murder. They would be tried and later convicted, though that would be later overturned, and they would eventually be exonerated.

Fine performances by the leads, and good direction by Fred Shepisi make this a memorable and interesting tragic tale of a rush to judgment by both the press and public, a situation still relevant today.

The draw of this film for me was to see Meryl Streep in the role that brought her her 8th career Oscar nomination. She plays Lindy Chamberlain, a woman whose baby went missing on a camping trip and who subsequently was tried for her murder when people started to doubt her version of events (that a dingo ran off with the baby).

This is a pretty decent film. Nothing about it ever rises much above the middlebrow, but what's there is engaging, and it paints an effective picture of the role media and public opinion play in, here, the Australian judicial system, but the same is true for anywhere.

The film's biggest flaw is its editing, which is ragged and choppy. The editor may have been hoping the quick pace would add to the film's forward momentum, but it instead makes the film feel underdeveloped, scenes just flying by without being fully fleshed out. It almost made me wonder if the editor didn't have a lot of great material to work with and was trying to make the best out of a less than ideal situation.

This film is probably most known for the "Seinfeld" episode where Elaine hilariously quotes it (misquotes it, as it happens) at a party.

Grade: B+

When I first saw "A Cry in the Dark", I had no idea what the plot was. But when I saw it, I was shocked at what it portrayed. When I saw it a second time in an Australian Cinema class, I realized a second point: communication issues. You see, when a dingo snatched Lindy Chamberlain's (Meryl Streep) baby, she and her husband Michael (Sam Neill) were grief-stricken but didn't show it. As Seventh Day Adventists, they believed that God willed this to happen, and so they couldn't mourn it. But when people all over Australia saw their lack of sadness, everyone started believing that Lindy did it herself.

The point is, the wrong message got communicated to the public, and it turned people against Lindy. Even though this was a pure accident, it still happened. It may be one of the biggest disasters resulting from the existence of mass media, regardless of any media outlet's political views.

As for the performances, Streep does a very good job with an Australian accent (no surprise there), and Sam Neill is equally great. You will probably get blown away just by what you see here. Definitely one of Fred Schepisi's best movies ever.

Once again an outstanding performance by Meryl Streep ,achieving the tour de force of making us feel for a character which only an actress of the first order could make in turns pitiful,harsh,full of dignity ,but also disturbing and threatening.(Just compare with Streisand's poor acting in "nuts" )We almost believed she might possibly be guilty,such is the talent of this actress.Sam Neill is fine too,in a portrayal of a distraught suffering man (a minister!) whose faith is put through the mill.Religion plays a prominent part in this true story:it's because people do not know it very well that the couple seems different :in ancient times they would have passed for sorcerer and witch and been burned alive .Numerous sequences are given over to the populace's reactions ,barroom philosophizing which leads to slander and hatred.

Directing is conventional,but the actors are everything.Watch the movie for them.

This movie made my blood boil because, despite being set in Australia and happening over 40 years ago, innocent people being railroaded by the media and general public is still happening today.

The amount of phoney evidence presented at the court is beyond ridiculous and has no real basis or logical sense. This was entirely a court of public opinion - for the simple fact that people did not believe a dingo, a wild, scavenging animal used to harsh environments, NOT a dog, as it is repeatedly referred to by the court, could have taken a baby from a tent.

Colonialism and ignorance definitely played part in Lindy Chamberlain's media backlash and unjust conviction. The people completely dismiss the aboriginal people's testimony. Because, you know, racism. They're quick to pass judgment on a grieving mother simply because she didn't act the way they would if their baby had been killed. They target the Chamberlains because of their niche religion. And they claim the dingo was innocent because an animal that looks like your beautiful, every day canine pet couldn't possibly be capable of brutally killing a baby.

It took 32 years for the official cause of Azaria Chamberlain's death to be re-instated as a dingo attack. Way too long over due. But at least it's something.

Once you pick your jaw up from off the floor from the realization that they... somehow... managed to put this thing together so fast that it was released the same year the case ended, you'll find that it's not half bad. The plot is engaging and interesting, and the pacing is fast, with this covering many situations, and thus often jumping swiftly on to the next one after a line or two has been spoken. Where this really stands out is the acting. The performances are excellent. Neill and Streep are both impeccable. It's also cool to hear so much Australian spoken in a Hollywood film, and even those who don't come naturally to it at least attempt an accent. The cinematography and editing are nice enough, but they don't really go beyond the standard stuff. This movie's story is compelling and the fact that it is authentic just makes it all the more chilling. While I have not read the novel or heard of what happened outside of this picture, I understand that it is quite close to the truth. There is some moderate to strong language and disturbing content in this. It is, at times, a downright great courtroom drama. I recommend this to any fellow fan of such. 7/10

...a wise man once said. It's always difficult to make drama out of a recent true story, but it's competently done here, thanks in no small measure to fine performances. On a vacation trip to Ayre's Rock, a small baby is snatched from a tent by a dingo, but the mother (Meryl Streep) is charged with murder and the father (Sam Neill) is charged as an accessory. The search for justice keeps us in suspense.