Advertisements

What the Hell Happened to Nicole Kidman?

Nicole Kidman

Nicole Kidman

During the 1990’s, Kidman was one half of Hollywood’s biggest power couple.  During that time, she became one of the most sought-after actresses in Hollywood.  Even after her divorce from Tom Cruise, Kidman’s career continued to soar.  She starred in big movies, was a darling of critics and finally won an Academy Award in 2002.  These days, Kidman is still a sought-after actress.  She can still be counted on to rack up nominations come awards time.  But her career has cooled.  The movies are smaller.  Her spotlight has dimmed.

What the hell happened?

kidman - bmx bandits

Nicole Kidman – BMX Bandits – 1983

Kidman was born to Australian parents who were living in Hawaii.  That made her eligible for dual citizenship in Australia and the US.  Kidman’s family returned to Australia when she was four.  In 1983, at the age of 15, Kidman started acting in Australian film and televison.  Her first film was a remake of an Australian holiday favorite, Bush Christmas.  (Between being born in Hawaii and starring in Bush Christmas, I am trying really hard not to make any jokes about recent presidents.)

That year, Kidman became a regular on the Australian TV show, Five Mile Creek.  She also appeared in BMX Bandits (pictured above).  To get the part, Kidman lied about being able to ride BMX bikes.  During filming, she sprained an ankle.  No female stunt double could be found, so Kidman was doubled by a man.

kidman - dead calm

Nicole Kidman and Billy Zane – Dead Calm – 1989

Kidman continued working in Australian film and television throughout the 80s.  In 1989, Kidman starred opposite Sam Neill and Billy Zane in Phillip Noyce’s nautical thriller, Dead Calm.

Kidman and Neill play a couple who go out to sea to after the death of their son.  Their getaway is interrupted when they come upon a sinking boat.  They rescue the sole survivor played by Zane.  He repays their kindness by terrorizing them at sea.

Dead Calm received almost universally positive reviews.  It was a hit in Australia and crossed over into the US.

kidman cruise

Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise

It is impossible to discuss Kidman’s Hollywood career without talking about her relationship with Tom Cruise.  Cruise was married to actress Mimi Rogers.  Rogers brought Cruise into Scientology.  The couple split in 1990.  Like all of Cruise’s three divorces, the details were shrouded in privacy.  Years later, Rogers offered her take:

“Tom was seriously thinking of becoming a monk. At least for that period of time, it looked as though marriage wouldn’t fit into his overall spiritual need. And he thought he had to be celibate to maintain the purity of his instrument. Therefore it became obvious we had to split.”

Lawrence Wright, author of the book, Going Clear, told a different story.  According to the book, church-leader David Miscavige saw Cruise as a rock star who could be the public face of Scientology.  Anything Cruise wanted, Cruise got.  And Cruise wanted the 21-year-old Kidman.  According to Marty Rathbun, former second-in-command and now a vocal critic of Scientology, he was sent to Rogers’ home with divorce papers and told her: ‘ “This is the right thing to do for Tom, because he is going to do lots of good for Scientology.” That was the end of Mimi Rogers.’

Kidman was a Catholic who reportedly tolerated Cruise’s involvement in Scientology without embracing it.  Her father was a clinical psychologist which worried some Scientologists given their views on psychology.  But Miscavige couldn’t tell Cruise “no”.  They started a file on Kidman while they were introducing her to Cruise.

kidman - days of thunder

Nicole Kidman – Days of Thunder – 1990

Cruise cast Kidman in his 1990 racing drama, Days of Thunder and the co-stars began dating.

Days of Thunder was directed by Tony Scott who had directed Cruise in his star-making role in Top Gun.  Critics noted the similarities between the two movies.  They referred to Days of Thunder as “Top Gun on wheels”.

The production was extremely difficult.  Producers Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer fought with Scott about everything.  Even screen-writer Robert Towne got in on the action.  The movie fell three months behind schedule.

It was released to mixed reviews, but it was a hit at the box office.

Next: Far and Away and Malice

Advertisements

Posted on April 20, 2013, in Movies, What the Hell Happened?, WTHH Actress and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 409 Comments.

  1. Talk about a one-two punch… we get this treat, mere days after Chevy Chase? Really good stuff Lebeau!!

    This WTHH subject is intriguing ’cause I’d argue that Nicole Kidman is permanent A list if not A+ list. Yet you are right her star is no longer white hot. Still I’m willing to bet my house she’ll go on working for a long time, with her impressive list of awards and nominations.

    “Just Go With It”, aside from being a Sandler movie that took him from being fingernails on a chalkboard, to a likeable actor, was a vehicle for Kidman playing a very well executed supporting role with just the right element of satire. As you noted, she had done this earlier as the lead in “To Die For”. It was amazing to see on the big screen. Like Meg Ryan, another legendary beauty with serious credentials, if Kidman quits messing with her face and ages naturally, she can give Meryl a run for her money.

    Like

    • My goal for the year has been one WTHH every other week. I was cranking them out one per week early in the year. But my schedule has been shifting around the last few weeks which has caused me to miss a few articles. I’m still ahead of schediule, but I didn’t want to go too many weeks without a new article. I figured I owed you guys a little extra.

      No doubt Kidman’s situation is different from anyone else I have written about in the past. She hasn’t truly disappeared. But I think to mainstream audiences, she has. She’s still working quite a bit and I think she will continue to do so in the future. But her movies are no longer showing in the multiplexes like they used to be.

      In a way, she has transitioned from a Julia Roberts/Sandra Bullock into a Jennifer Jason Leigh. And there is nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately, leading lady roles are few and far between for actresses Kidman’s age. She’s really exceeding expectations.

      I do think she squandered her most marketable years with movies like Stepford Wives and Bewitched. That was the part of her career that inspired me to write about Kidman. For a few years, she was in one high profile flop after another.

      Like

      • Swayze probably will be the first. I could see doing Natalie Wood. There’s a lot to write about there. It’s also been suggested I should do Brittany Murphy.

        Like

      • Should be interesting. I feel like enough time has past that I could do it.

        On the other hand, the title of the series upsets people when the subject is alive. So I haven’t crossed that line yet.

        Like

      • There’s an idea!

        Going back past the 80s starts to get a little more challenging. Not impossible. Daffy did it very well in his 12 Angry Men series. Just more work for me. 😉

        I have never really taken Madonna’s film career seriously. She’s primarily a pop star. She really only headlined one decent movie. But eventually, I could get around to her.

        Like

      • Can’t think of any Madonna films other than Desperately Seeking Susan. At the time, I recall it being a hit, especially among college age viewers. Madonna was the reigning Queen of pop, of dance, of cool, of MTV.. (this was in the days where MTV was good and known for music videos only).. you name it. But in all honestly no one really took her seriously for the acting. She played a sex kitten who rocked out to her hit tunes… how much of a stretch was that? It was a fun movie, and I did watch it several times but not after the 80s were over.

        Like

        • She was also in small roles in Dick Tracy and A League of Their Own. Most of her movies, like Body of Evidence, were flops. The only movie in which she starred that was a hit (from memory anyway) was Evita.

          Like

      • OMG, you are so freakin’ right, I forgot all about A League of Their Own! RB is getting senile. Madonna did great in that role, but it was little more than a cameo. Never saw Evita. Don’t get me wrong, I like Madonna and was a big fan back then, but I almost feel like it’s blasphemous to discuss her in the same comments section of a serious actress.

        Like

      • Brittany Murphy arguably didn’t become a “star proper” (although she had been working as a child/teen star on TV and movies since the early ’90s) until she appeared in “8 Mile”. For a while, she was being pushed to be the next female star in movies like “Just Married”, and “Uptown Girls”, and “Little Black Book”. She even hosted “Saturday Night Live” off the heels of appearing in “8 Mile”. There was a time in which she could legitimately be considered a bigger star than her “Clueless” cohort Alicia Silverstone, who of course, was supposed to be the “next big thing” until “Batman & Robin” and “Excess Baggage” put an end to that.

        Like

        • Was Murphy ever considered A-list? I think Silverstone at her peak was a bigger star than Murphy ever was. But at Murphy’s peak, she was higher than Silverstone who had fallen off the face of the earth by that time.

          Like

        • And let us not forget, Brittany Murphy and Winona Ryder did all the heavy lifting in “Girl, Interrupted” only to see the Oscar go to Angelina Jolie for basically showcasing her wild side on screen. I will forever be convinced that was one of the most drastically unfair Oscar outcomes of all time.

          Like

        • That one doesn’t bother me really. The Academy has a tendency to award Best Supporting Actress to promisng actresses they think will grow into successful leading ladies. Jolie is one of the rare cases where they guessed right.

          Like

        • The Academy- and many audiences- love the scenery eating role. Goes back to Mercutio in Romeo and Juliet.

          Like

      • “blackballed”? I not know of this…how was BM blackballed?

        Like

  2. Such a stupid article. She got older? Hah! Roles dry up for most actresses after 40. Nicole Kidman’s days as a leading actress are over? No… She’s got Before I Go To Sleep coming up, Grace of Monaco and The Family Fang–You should be focusing on Renee Zellweger & Julia Roberts for that sort of thing.

    Also, Australia didn’t get mixed to negative reviews, it got mixed to positive. (Look at Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB etc) and the reason it looks like she got so many Golden Globe nods is because you’re mentioning them over every other award she got nominated for. Didn’t mention the SAG award for Paperboy, choose to focus on GG. Didn’t mention the BAFTA for The Others, choose to focus on the GG. Didn’t mention the Emmy for H&G choose to focus on the GG.

    In future when doing an article, at least try to be unbiased. Your poor writing skill and lack of research (Wikipedia isn’t the only site out there!) shine through here.

    Like

    • I’m sorry you didn’t like the article. Not everyone does. We can have a civil conversation about it without name-calling, can’t we?

      I’m not entirely sure what has you so upset. I pointed out that roles dry up for actresses over 40. So we seem to be in agreement.

      Also, I never said that Kidman’s days as a leading lady were over. I said she seems to be transitioning to more supporting roles. Which is common when the leading lady roles start to dry up.

      In the past, Kidman starred in a mainstream movie annually. She was a supporting player in Stoker (2013) and The Paperboy (2012). Hemingway & Gellhorn was an HBO movie. Trespass barely made it into theaters before being dumped on video.

      Just Go With It was a supporting role. Rabbit Hole was a lead. But it’s a movie most movie goers weren’t aware of. Nine was a supporting role.

      Her last mainstream lead role was Australia in 2008. How is that not transitioning into supporting roles?

      It may help to know this is the 43rd article in an on-going series. For the most partt, I focus on Oscars and GG as they are the most prominent awards. I throw in Razzies for fun and to show the other side of things. I will make reference to other awards, but I rarely list them. Kidman got so many awards and nominations, the article (which was already quite long) would double in size if I listed them all. No thanks.

      Once agian, sorry this rubbed you the wrong way. I’m happy to discuss it with you further here in the comments section if you can use a grown-up tone.

      Like

  3. Just went over and checked your Jennifer Jason Leigh article (You seem to like her!) to see if your bias seeped through in other work, and guess what? It does!

    You stated Margot At The Wedding “received mixed reviews and barely registered at the box office.” yet in the JJL article, you claim “You can probably guess by now that the movie was a hit with critics even if most audiences have never heard of it. For her part, Leigh received several awards nominations from various film critics’ groups.”

    Like

    • Sometimes there are inconsistencies. Especially when we are dealing with mixed reviews. I missed the boat on the JJL article in that regard. Turns out the reviews were less enthusiastic than I remembered. I’ll have to go back and correct that article. Thanks for pointing out my mistake.

      But there’s no bias here. I like both actresses quite well. In fact I came away from writing this article with an increased respect for Kidman.

      Like

  4. Assessing Nicole Kidman: You Know The Drill:
    http://www.pajiba.com/career_assessments/nicole-kidman-career-assessment-you-know-the-drill.php

    Subject: Nicole Kidman, 43-year old Australian-American actress

    Date of Assessment: February 11, 2011

    Positive Buzzwords: Versatile, experimental

    Negative Buzzwords: Botox, Botox, Botox

    The Case: We meet with this week’s subject, Nicole Kidman, as she stands at the forefront of a cavernous discrepancy between her former proven abilities as an actress and the effects of an addiction to face-freezing cosmetic procedures. It’s a very sad situation, really, to think that Kidman has lost touch with both her reflection in the mirror and the fact that an actor must be able to communicate emotion as a key element of the profession. Even more telling is that Kidman won an Oscar and, subsequently, went on to parody the plastic nature of the industry with such expressionless fervor.

    Now, Kidman began her career quite humbly in her native Australia with movies like 1983’s BMX Bandits (seriously, check out that hair) as well as several television and film appearances before coming into the public (and Tom Cruise’s) awareness with Dead Calm (1989); and despite participating in a Cruise trilogy of films (Days of Thunder; Far and Away; Eyes Wide Shut), Kidman’s proven herself to be a capable actress much more than his subsequent, uh, wife will ever manage to do. Ultimately, the Cruise-Kidman marriage saw Kidman stand on her own by diversifying the resumé with varying degrees of critical but mostly commercial successes in the thriller (Malice; The Peacemaker), black comedy (To Die For), blockbuster (Batman Forever), and romcom (Practical Magic) genres. She also didn’t do half bad in the corset-wearing department within an adaptation of Henry James’ The Portrait of a Lady. From there, Kidman set her sights upon becoming an Oscar darling or, at the very least, not only an actress but also an artist in the following movies: Moulin Rouge!; The Others; The Hours; Dogville; Cold Mountain; and Birth. Then and for whatever reason, Kidman chose to handicap her own abilities to communicate emotion (as an actress and an artist must do) by entering the first phase of her Botox era as reflected by The Stepford Wives; The Interpreter; Bewitched; and Margot at the Wedding.

    The fallout was disastrous, for audiences were aghast to discover that most of Kidman’s face remained frozen throughout these movies. Commence the next phase of the Botox era with many consecutive, big-budget flops: The Invasion (an $80 million budget that reaped a mere $15 million gross, even though Kidman received a $17 million salary); The Golden Compass ($180 million budget with a $70 gross); Australia ($130 million budget with a $50 million gross); and Nine (the $80 million budget musical with a mere $20 million gross). And with good reason, these films mercilessly flopped for, unlike her previous roles, Nicole stopped delivering outward performances to the point where her Australia character was solely portrayed through ornate costuming and sweeping landscapes, which was sporadically interrupted only by the immutable appearance of something that I once described as the Forehead of Doom.

    Look, it’s not like I’m purposely setting out (as in previous moments at other venues) to trash Kidman for her unmoving Botox face, but it’s become such a facet of her non-personality on camera that everyone knows about it. Quite simply at this point, that forehead is notorious and has even been the subject of an animated retrospective. Never mind the time that Kidman toured Haiti, met with earthquake survivors, and still couldn’t convincingly evoke concern due to the concrete face. Hell, even her Rabbit Hole director, John Cameron Mitchell, was sent out on a pre-release publicity interview to specifically discuss the Forehead Situation: “People would ask me, ‘How’s her face?’ It’s just so weird. That was just an augur of the types of films she had made, which weren’t of great quality.”

    Yeah, let’s just point the blame elsewhere other than the fact that the actress destroyed her own ability to communicate with an audience. Now, the subject matter of Rabbit Hole seemed tailor-made to provide Kidman with ample opportunity to finally drop the cosmetic injections and fillers before reminding the world that she’s “still got it.” Yet Kidman remains an unmarketable, porcelain doll of a mess who, far too late, has admitted within interviews that she “tried” Botox (and tried it and tried it again). After several years of denials, I’m afraid that most people no longer care about the so-called truth of the matter.

    Prognosis: Obviously, Kidman’s camp used Rabbit Hole as a sort of last-ditch attempt to revive a flagging acting career, and it actually received some good reviews (even one from our own Daniel Carlson), but I haven’t watched the movie yet because it didn’t screen in my city nor did it show in many others. So the questions remain for most of Kidman’s former audience-at-large as to whether her face can realistically portray emotions and whether or not people want to take a chance by paying to watch her huge, waxy face on the big screen ever again.

    Of course, Kidman appears this weekend within the latest Adam Sandler/Jennifer Aniston film (Just Go with It), which will probably do just fine because most people don’t even realize that she’s in the damn film. Her other upcoming projects include Trespass and the made-for-television Hemingway & Gellhorn as well as several in-development titles, most of which won’t happen (one of which, The Danish Girl, would feature Kidman as the premier sex-reassignment patient, but the insufferable Gwyneth Paltrow has already bailed on the project). On that last note, Kidman had better be able to function in her former capacity, or the drag queens of society will have their revenge.

    Like

    • Stumbled upon this thread very after the fact, but wanted to point out a couple corrections. The Golden Compass, which she’s perfectly cast in, grossed almost 400 million internationally and by definition was a hit… particularly relevant since it was based on books that were best sellers in Britain, not America. Same with “Australia”, whose international (the title says it all) box office of 211 million was not shabby either…not a hit considering the production budget, but certainly not a flop.

      I’m not going to argue about Kidman’s predilection for Botox, but 2 of the movies you mentioned as examples where this supposedly impaired her acting capabilities, “Margot at the Wedding” and “Rabbit Hole”, actually yielded performances from her that were highly regarded by the critics.

      She’s an actress that definitely grown on me as the years have gone by. I wish more people had seen her roles in “Birth” and “Dogville”, among others, to truly appreciate this woman’s capabilities and versatility.

      Like

  5. Nicole Kidman’s career goes straight to video:
    http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/nicole-kidmans-career-goes-straight-to-video/story-e6frfmvr-1226114927176

    NICOLE Kidman’s career has officially hit the skids – her next film is going straight to video.

    The Oscar-winner, whose very name used to be enough to command space at the multiplexes and a lavish promotional campaign, is facing the indignity of being dumped in the movie graveyard.

    Worse still is the fact that her new film isn’t a low-budget art-house flick but a mainstream thriller co-starring another Oscar-winner, Nic Cage.

    In Trespass Kidman and Cage play a wealthy couple whose fractured relationship is tested when a group of ruthless criminals invade their house and take them hostage. It is the sort of movie Hollywood used to crank out in its sleep – and rely upon to make a decent return at the box-office. Attach two big stars and watch the money flow.

    The fact that Trespass’s producers are releasing the film in US cinemas on the same day as making it available on video on demand – and putting it out on DVD only a few weeks later – suggests they don’t have much faith in Kidman or Cage’s ability to attract a sufficient audience.

    Kidman’s star power has long been on the wane. Her last film, Just Go With It, did make more than $100m at the US box office but she wasn’t the star: she was the butt of Adam Sandler and Jennifer Aniston’s jokes. She didn’t even get billing on the posters. The last four Hollywood films of which she was the star – Nine, Australia, The Golden Compass and The Invasion – were box office disappointments. You have to go back to Happy Feet in 2006 to find a Kidman film that made any decent money – and even that was an animated film.

    Kidman is still the darling of the Academy Awards – she was nominated for best actress for her moving performance in the indie drama Rabbit Hole – but once stars cross the line into straight-to-video fare, they tend to lose the respect of voters and, more importantly, the all-powerful studio bosses.

    Tellingly, Trespass isn’t a big studio film but the work of a second-tier outfit, Millennium Films, which makes mostly mid-budget movies staring fading stars, such as Val Kilmer, Michael Douglas and Ed Norton, many of which go straight-to-video outside the US. Their films are not the kind of Oscar-bait Kidman is usually associated with so she must have been feeling the pinch.

    Things can’t have looked good when she signed on – Trespass’s director, Joel Schumacher, hasn’t made a film that’s seen the inside of a cinema since 2007 – the Jim Carrey flop The Number 23 – and hasn’t had a box office hit since 1996. He is also responsible for the shockingly awful Batman and Robin.

    Embarrassingly, Kidman’s next projects are a TV movie and another film bankrolled by Millennium.

    Although many a movie star has bounced back from a string of box office flops – Michael Caine and Sean Connery made a career out of it – the current realities of movie-making, where franchises like Transformers and Batman, not stars, rule the box office, suggest that Kidman could be in the graveyard for quite some time.

    Like

    • 10 Terrible Movies That Made Great Actors Look Like Failed Amateurs:
      http://whatculture.com/film/10-terrible-movies-that-made-great-actors-look-like-failed-amateurs.php/9

      1. Nicole Kidman – Trespass

      Nicole Kidman has been putting in dazzling screen performances since she began her career back in the early ’80’s, but 2011 is not a year that she will reflect on with fondness or nostalgia. This was not only the year that she was nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for her role in the Adam Sandler rom-com Just Go With It, but also the year she was dragged down to a startlingly low level alongside Nicolas Cage in the home invasion thriller Trespass.

      The second film by Joel Schumacher to appear on this list is a considerably meaner effort than his superhero flick Batman & Robin, with the action sequences here taking the form of pain, anguish, and torture. Simplistic and contrived, Trespass leans so heavily on its star leads that its running time has barely ticked past the half hour mark before Cage and Kidman inelegantly collapse along with the movie itself. For Cage this is nothing new – the way he embraced the ludicrous The Wicker Man was almost admirable – but it’s strange and unpleasant to see Kidman in such an unappealing screenplay as Trespass.

      Critically panned and a big box-office flop, Trespass’ sole claim to fame is how it remains one of the few films ever to have made Nicole Kidman look bad. And that is just not cool.

      Like

    • Nicole Kidman goes trashy, crazy in ‘The Paperboy’: deliciously awful?:
      http://www.celebitchy.com/243432/nicole_kidman_goes_trashy_crazy_in_the_paperboy_deliciously_awful/

      What happened to Nicole Kidman’s career? Did it start to fade when she began to Botox so heavily? Or did she begin to ‘Tox when her career began to fade? Unknown. What I do know is that Nicole used to be one of the most interesting actresses out there, and nowadays she’s just… I don’t know. In need of better representation? In need of a reality check about what kind of roles she should be playing now? Something like that. Anyway, Nicole’s latest movie is The Paperboy. The film premiered in Cannes to nearly universal scorn. Nicole’s performance was panned. The casting overall was panned. The story, the script and the direction were all heavily criticized. Almost as soon as the film was screened for critics in Cannes, certain plot details became public. Like the hilarious/awful scene in which Nicole hunkers down and pees on poor Zac Efron. That sentence says all I need to know about this movie.

      Like

      • Is Kidman’s frozen face ruining her career?:
        http://www.today.com/id/22044684/ns/today-entertainment/t/kidmans-frozen-face-ruining-her-career/#.UXN-K6KOQRg

        In the brilliant, little-seen 2004 film “Birth,” Nicole Kidman stars as well-to-do New Yorker who comes to believe that a 10-year-old boy is the reincarnation of her long-deceased husband. There’s an extraordinary scene early on, where Kidman and her fiancé attend the symphony; the camera stays locked on Kidman’s face for two solid minutes, as we see a panoply of emotions rocket through her mind, subtly revealing themselves in her countenance.

        As movie close-ups go, it’s one of the greats, to be placed alongside silent screen legends like Lillian Gish and Maria Falconetti. What Kidman does in that two minutes, however, acts as a perfect summation of what’s going right and what’s going wrong for her career.
        On the plus side, Kidman frequently attaches herself to daring and unusual indie films, often made by some of today’s most provocative directors. It’s hard to imagine, say, Julia Roberts or Reese Witherspoon dashing off to Europe to work with troublemaker Lars von Trier (as Kidman did for “Dogville”) or romancing a wolfman-suited Robert Downey, Jr. (“Fur,” from “Secretary” director Steven Shainberg) or even making something as challenging as “Birth.”

        In a sense, Kidman’s career path seems more European than American; foreign actresses like Catherine Deneuve or Isabelle Huppert will often balance the glamour roles with down-and-dirty, gut-wrenchers directed by the current generation of cinematic provocateurs.

        Kidman’s record of interspersing commercial projects with art films has, alas, been less successful, but one can hardly blame her for that. Projects like “Bewitched” and “The Stepford Wives” and “The Invasion” may have turned out dreadfully, but given the talent involved behind the camera, they all no doubt seemed like better bets when Kidman originally signed on. And it behooves Kidman to retain her status as a box-office draw, if only because that clout ensures that the arty stuff will actually get made.

        ‘What has she done to her face?’

        Alas, that “Birth” close-up also reminds us of Kidman’s most recent career challenge — did she paralyze her face in the name of beauty? In the current “Margot at the Wedding,” one becomes distracted during the film’s climactic scene because of the eerie frozen quality of Kidman’s features. Salon.com film critic Stephanie Zacharek, in her review of the film, was compelled to ask, “What has she done to her face? … Kidman’s skin is, without a doubt, beautiful. But it has turned into her greatest limitation, a boundary beyond which she can’t stretch.”

        Her paralyzed visage is even more apparent in “The Golden Compass,” where Kidman is otherwise brilliantly malevolent as the evil Mrs. Coulter. Kidman certainly has the voice and the presence for the role, but her cheeks look unnaturally porcelain. As compelling as she is, audience members will be forgiven for being distracted over whether or not Kidman’s eyebrows will actually move in any given scene.

        And let’s be very clear about something — Hollywood has shown itself to be merciless on the subject of aging women, so it’s unfair to attribute the inclination toward plastic surgery to mere vanity on the part of actresses. Women in the industry know they have to look a certain way, or the parts start drying up. But at what point does the elimination of wrinkles justify a performer’s destruction of her most valuable asset? The face of an actress is her instrument, and without it, she becomes a statue, a painting, a frieze.

        On the tipping point

        The current issue of Radar magazine — the cover of which features Kidman as a Barbie doll, with the screaming headline “Help! I Can’t Move My Face!” — notes that casting directors are beginning to redouble their efforts in Canada and the United Kingdom, where actors are less likely to have altered their looks. The fact that said casting directors are principally responsible for the Botox-ing of the current generation of American actors probably bodes badly for film and television, but well for plastic surgeons abroad.

        Radar also observes that Kidman, who turned 40 this summer, is at the tipping point between natural aging and plastic-surgery victimhood. One hopes that there’s a road in the middle —there are, after all, distinguished ladies of American movies who have allowed themselves to age “gracefully,” which may just be another of way of saying, “has had some work, but the subtle kind that doesn’t leave you looking like an alien.”

        So what advice can this lowly critic (and admirer) offer to Ms. Kidman?

        Stop doing whatever you’re doing to your face, at least when you’re working. The gauntlet of horror that is the red carpet is one thing, but the movie camera needs to see you express yourself through your furrowed brow, your crinkled nose, your wry smile. We’re all getting older with each passing year, but your immense talent should be enough to make you a desirable commodity even if a line or two should surface in your peaches-and-cream complexion. If nothing else, think of how little competition you’ll have among actresses who actually look their age.

        Few of your contemporaries can hold a close-up the way you do, or speak volumes with just the slightest movement of the eyes or mouth. Please don’t deprive yourself, or your audience, of the full range of your gifts.

        Like

        • Hi Mr. Clay!

          “As movie close-ups go” the absolute pinnacle is Barbara Stanwyck whilst her husband is being strangled in the car in “Double Indemnity.” Cannot be duplicated!

          In comparison, with the sound off, Kidman’s 2 minutes are more akin to her needing to go to the loo.

          Thoroughly enjoy your writing.

          Thanks Lebeau!

          b

          Like

  6. The Curious Case of Nicole Kidman’s Career:
    http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/49860685.html

    Kidman was a critical success in Australia, mostly on TV, before “Dead Calm” brought her to international prominence and marriage to Tom Cruise. Though this union occurred in that distant era when the Hollywood PR machine was omnipotent, and would have merrily mounted a posthumous defamation of Galileo if the price was right, it was met with suspicion and scorn from the outset. Many openly opined that Kidman sought a parachute onto the A-list, and that was among the kinder speculations. As Hollywood pacts go this one did had a whiff of Faust about it.

    The fan base of Cruise has been in retreat for a few years now and it’s obvious that Kidman has been tainted by her decade on Planet Tom. As willing co-star of the Tom Cruise Show she is a just target to many. With the notorious Pat Kingsley as the director, nothing remotely unflattering of Cruise was tolerated. Kingsley, now retired, and her ilk are responsible for the flourishing of the Internet scavengers who can use her and her tactics as an excuse to ply their trade and rub the noses of the PR puppet masters in the excremental remains of the controlled access game.

    Rather than retreat from pointless publicity, the newly-single Kidman recklessly embraced it, though she seems to have learned her lesson. A photograph of her “jumping for joy” after the finalization of her divorce briefly, quickly, became a gift for the media. Whether this snap was taken when she expressed a particular emotion is irrelevant. The Cruise years taught her the inevitable (mis)interpretation of image. After this appeared, she began to affirm her love for Cruise on TV. Then after marrying a singer who quickly turned out to have an addiction she didn’t know about, she and Cruise embarked on a keeping-up-with-the-Joneses approach to parenthood with their new partners. Like many actresses Kidman has supped the poisoned chalice of fashion and image to maintain her profile even as her occasional appearances like an android delighted her detractors.

    What can be said in Kidman’s defense? Well she is without doubt a great actress. Her daring and ambition have never been matched, I think, by an established and connected Hollywood talent. Like them all she had appeared in dross but the failures of “Cold Mountain,” “Bewitched” and “The Stepford Wives” should not be laid solely at Kidman’s door, as is the case. It is true she hasn’t brought much of an audience to her smaller movies, but she is hardly alone in that. (Being Mrs. Tom Cruise didn’t do much for Mimi Rogers either, who proved her chops with a sensational performance in “The Rapture” that was ignored. The modest promise of “Pieces of April” is now a distant memory for Katie Holmes.)

    Kidman’s exceptional performance in “To Die For,” as a young woman who will do whatever it takes to climb the greasy pole, was seen by some as expression of her own ambition. I think it is work more deserving of her Oscar than her gimmicky supporting role in “The Hours.” “Dogville,” “Birth,” “Fur,” were all challenging material well off the Hollywood common run and ideal for an actress stretching herself.

    Compared to the choices of Cameron Diaz or Halle Berry, say, or the abysmal Katherine Heigl, who gets her mother to help produce a script where she gets “laughs” from remotely controlled knickers — this after belittling the writers on “Grey’s Anatomy,” who brought her to prominence in the first place — Kidman is recklessly daring. She is braver and more ambitious than any other prominent actress. She may have bungled the public side of her career but as an actress she is in a different league. Even “Moulin Rouge” was radical compared to “Chicago.”

    It’s hard to imagine another actress who could have made more of the aimless mess of “Margot at the Wedding,” and could anyone else have maintained their dignity in the fiasco of “Australia?” Jane Campion’s “Portrait of a Lady” was rather stiff (except for Barbara Hershey) because Kidman and Campion were arguably too faithful to Henry James.

    Kidman has become the totem of Hollywood’s over-rewarded ranks. Despite the talents of, say, Dennis Quaid or Aaron Eckhart, repeated attempts to launch them as leading men have floundered. Jeff Goldblum has been in “Jurassic Park” and “Independence Day” but he is hardly a superstar. I happen to consider all of these actors very talented but despite their consistent commercial failure they are spared the abuse hurled at Kidman.

    It is almost impossible as filmgoer, or mere celebrity-watcher, to grasp a star’s true character but anyone who has seen Kidman with her childhood friend Naomi Watts, whose road to success was more tortuous and enthusiasm for privacy unwavering, it’s hard to believe that Kidman is a ruthless master schemer.Yes, they are fantastic actresses, but I have no difficulty believing that their friendship is genuine and that Kidman reveals, however briefly, something true about herself.

    As it becomes almost impossible for serious performers to build a movie career, I suspect Nicole Kidman will be judged more flatteringly than has hitherto been the case.

    Like

    • You need to give “Cold Mountain” a second chance. I was a little iffy with it when it came out in the theaters, but with a second go-around this past year, I was surprisingly much, much more appreciative. Kidman, Law, and Zellweger are all actually quite good here.

      Like

  7. The Sacrificing of Nicole Kidman:
    http://mooninthegutter.blogspot.com/2007/08/sacrificing-of-nicole-kidman.html

    Upon the release of Lars Von Trier’s audacious and brilliant DOGVILLE (2003), an exhausted Nicole Kidman decided to drop out of its follow up films and explore some lighter projects. After completing work on the emotionally draining BIRTH (2004) in which she gave possibly her greatest performance, Kidman signed on to two films that promised to be less stressful but hopefully still artistically rewarding.
    Nicole Kidman has always been a fearless actress. You can see that in her very earliest work for Australian tv in the eighties, specifically with her turn in the mini-series VIETNAM (1987) but she has also always kept her eye on commercial projects. Between the period between her break though role in Gus Van Sant’s TO DIE FOR (1995) and BIRTH she handled this shuffling between overtly mainstream roles and smaller independent productions incredibly well. Whether you are a fan or not, it is hard to deny that Kidman was one of the bravest stars of her generation and her best work shows a complicated actress capable of a deep range and an astonishing spiritual center.

    She seemed invincible for a period of about five years after surviving one of Stanley Kubricks most draining, and in my eyes one of his greatest, films EYES WIDE SHUT (1999). She finally won an Oscar for her portrayal of Virgina Woolf in THE HOURS (2002) although personally I would have given it to her for THE PORTRAIT OF A LADY (1996) or THE OTHERS (2001) first. After THE HOURS she could rightly be called one of the most respected and greatest actresses in the world but things suddenly begin to slip for her.

    David Fincher’s PANIC ROOM (2002) seemed to be the first sign something was wrong. Kidman sustained a bad injury on the set and had to be replaced by an eager and able Jodie Foster. She then unexpectedly dropped out of Jane Campion’s fierce IN THE CUT (2003), a film that she did end up producing. Then there was Von Trier.

    Lars Von Trier is unquestionably one of the great directors in cinema right now. Controversial, brave, frustrating and never easy to pin down, Von Trier also has a reputation for running his actors into the ground. Bjork is said to have checked herself into a hospital after her legendary turn in his DANCER IN THE DARK (1999) and one glance at the startling DOGVILLE CONFESSIONS (2003) shows that Kidman is in some sort of serious trouble. One particular moment I will never forget has her sprawled out on a bed, around the time of the infamous rape scene, staring into the camera and whispering, “Help Me.” It could have been a diva like moment except for the fact that I very much believe Nicole Kidman when she whispers this confessional short plea in this clip.

    So I don’t blame Nicole Kidman for backing away from her more uncompromising work after the DOGVILLE and BIRTH experiences but that doesn’t make me any less depressed about where her career is right now. Starting with the horrendous remake of THE STEPFORD WIVES (2004) right through to the recent and dismal THE INVASION (2007), Hollywood has reduced Kidman to a shell of her former self. Films like BEWITCHED (2005), THE INTERPRETER (2005) and FUR (2006) are not terrible (although BEWITCHED is pretty close) but they have each contributed to Kidman’s quick professional downfall. THE INVASION is the worst yet and the biggest waste of Nicole’s considerable talents since BATMAN FOREVER over 12 years ago.

    So what’s next for Nicole Kidman? Thankfully her upcoming projects seem more promising. First up is Noah Baumbach’s SQUID AND THE WHALE (2005) follow up, MARGOT AT THE WEDDING which will give Nicole the chance to act with the equally fierce Jennifer Jason Leigh (another great actress who has been woefully underused lately). She then has THE GOLDEN COMPASS which will team her up again with Daniel Craig and perhaps most excitedly, Baz Luhrmann’s AUSTRALIA. Now, I am not a fan of Luhrmann but I hope that the very fact that Kidman is out of Hollywood and back in Australia will relight some of the fire she has lost in the past few years.

    Kidman is also preparing NEED, which will match her with her real life best friend Naomi Watts and she is rumored for Wong’s remake of THE LADY FROM SHANGHAI. Where her career leads her at this point remains to be seen. Perhaps she peaked with DOGVILLE and BIRTH but I hope not. Nicole Kidman in the right role is a reminder of how powerful modern English Language cinema can be, unfortunately as of late she has been a reminder of how mainstream Hollywood can suck all of the life out of even the greatest performers. I wish her luck and hope for many future roles that are worthy of her talents.

    Nicole Kidman’s greatest work can be found in the following films. Anyone suspicious of her abilities are advised to check any of these out.

    In Chronological order:

    ROOM TO MOVE (1985): One of Nicole’s earliest roles was as a teenager in this hour long drama that was a part of the Australian WINNERS series. Even at this young age she was showing an amazing natural depth few actresses can claim to have.

    VIETNAM (1987): Nicole won the Australian Film Institutes’s Best Actress award for this powerful Australian miniseries. She was just 19 years old when when she made it.

    DEAD CALM (1989): Intense, claustrophobic little Australian thriller in which Kidman steals from her more experienced co-star, Sam Neil.

    FLIRTING (1991): Totally charming Australian coming of age film that featured early appearances by both Thandie Newton and Naomi Watts.

    TO DIE FOR (1995): Although it is becoming harder and harder to believe, Gus Van Sant was once a really fascinating director and this is one of his best films. Kidman eats the screen in one of the most unforgettable performances of the nineties.

    THE PORTRAIT OF A LADY (1996): Jane Campion’s finest two hours and one of Nicole’s most subtle and accomplished performances.

    EYES WIDE SHUT (1999): I have been called crazy for saying this but I will gladly repeat it here. This is my favorite Stanley Kubrick film, with the exception of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, and one of its biggest strengths is the complicated performance Kidman delivers for the grand master in this, his final film.

    THE OTHERS (2001): Alejandro Amenabar’s creepy and old fashioned ghost story is one of my favorite genre films of the decade and you would have to go all the way back to Mia Farrow in 1978’s FULL CIRCLE to find a more penetrating genre performance. A tour de force by everyone involved.

    BIRTHDAY GIRL (2001): A real wild card but a winning little film featuring one of Nicole’s sneakiest and sexiest performances.

    THE HOURS (2002): A film many people seem to hate but I can’t imagine too many having much of a problem with Nicole’s Oscar winning turn here. Compare her very natural work with the very mannered Julianne Moore and Meryl Streep at her most irritatingly histrionic.

    DOGVILLE (2003): Love it, hate it but admit that there has never been anything quite like it.

    THE HUMAN STAIN (2003): She is at her peak by this point and this is Robert Benton’s best film since 1982’s STILL OF THE NIGHT. A criminally ignored performance.

    COLD MOUNTAIN (2003): I am still surprised by the cold reception this film from Anthony Minghella got. A beautiful and ambitious civil war drama that brought Miramax to its knees. It features another totally dedicated performance by Kidman.

    BIRTH (2004): The end of the line so far. A chilling European Art Film disguised as a horror film penned by legendary BELLE DE JOUR writer Jean-Claude Carriere. Probably the best performance Nicole Kidman has ever given and possibly, along with SOLARIS and IT’S ALL ABOUT LOVE, the most underrated film of the decade. If Nicole Kidman’s career had to rest on the final moments in this film then she has already qualified herself as one of the true greats.

    Like

    • 10 of Nicole Kidman’s most versatile film roles:
      http://www.wellesleycinema.co.uk/features/10-of-nicole-kidmans-most-versatile-film-roles-c111519.html

      Dead Calm (1989)

      An early major motion picture for Kidman comes with the 1989 Australian thriller film Dead Calm. Based on the novel of the same title, Dead Calm entices viewers as a mass-murderer (Billy Zane) hijacks the yacht of Rae Ingram (Kidman) and her husband (Sam Neill) while sailing on the Pacific. The film was well received as a whole, with many noting in particular the full frontal sex scene between Zane and Kidman. In a desperate attempt of seduction, Dead Calm is recognized as a thriller for more reasons than one.

      To Die For (1995)

      One of Kidman’s most awarded performances in her silver screen career came in her role in the dark comedy film, To Die For. Aspiring TV broadcaster Suzanne Stone (Kidman) is willing to do anything to gain fame in the spotlight, even if that means killing her husband with the help of three teenagers. Although a mockumentary, To Die For features crime, comedy and drama, all while being inspired by real life events. Kidman’s performance was award winning, receiving numerous honours across the industry, including her first Empire and Golden Globe.

      Eyes Wide Shut (1999)

      Ten years later viewers see Kidman once again amidst a sexual film adaptation as sexual relations run high in the drama film Eyes Wide Shut. Adapted from the 1926 novella Dream Story, Eyes Wide Shut follows the sexual adventures of Dr. Bill Hartford (Tom Cruise) as he learns that his wife Alice (Kidman) just about had an affair. The doctor, shocked by his wife’s revelation, goes on a binder around New York City, in which he encounters a local underground cult engaging in a group orgy.

      The Others (2001)

      Marking her second appearance in a novella inspired film, Kidman stars alongside Christopher Eccleston in the 2001 psychological horror film The Others. Kidman plays Grace Stewart, a woman who is convinced her house, in which she resides with her two children is haunted. Written and directed by Spaniard Alejandro Amenábar, The Others received much praise, being awarded eight Goya Awards, including ”Best Film” as well as earning three Saturn Awards. Additionally, Kidman’s performance landed her nominations for ”Best Actress in Drama” at both the Golden Globes and BAFTAS.

      Moulin Rouge! (2001)

      Perhaps her most recognized film by name thus far, Kidman stars in the celebrated romantic musical, Moulin Rouge! Kidman dazzles on stage literally as Satine, the beautiful star of cabaret show Moulin Rouge, while winning the heart of a young English writer named Christian. Moulin Rouge! was nominated for eight Oscars, including the first musical to be nominated for ”Best Picture” in ten years. Kidman was named ”Actress of the Year” at the 2002 London Critics Circle Film Awards in addition to earning her second Golden Globe and Empire Awards.

      The Hours (2002)

      Based on the Pulitzer Prize winning novel of the same name, The Hours examines the story of Virginia Woolf’s novel Mrs. Dalloway. The Hours illustrates the novel’s effect on three generations of women who have each had personal experiences with suicide in their lives. Kidman portrays Virginia Woolf herself, as the author struggles to write her novel in 1920s England while suffering from depression.

      Cold Mountain (2003)

      Viewers get to see a more serious side of Kidman as she leads next to British sweetheart Jude Law, Renée Zellweger, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Natalie Portman, in war drama film Cold Mountain. Set during the American Civil War, this film romanticizes the journey of a wounded Confederate soldier as he returns back home to North Carolina, in hopes of being reunited with his soulmate.

      The Golden Compass (2007)

      For the first time on the big screen, audiences experience Kidman in the family friendly genre, as she stars in fantasy film, The Golden Compass. As the main antagonist, Kidman plays Mrs. Coulter, the mother of Lyra Belacqua. Lyra travels to the North to rescue her best friend and other children, kidnapped by an unknown organization in a parallel universe. The fantasy adventure is based on the novel Northern Lights, the first in His Dark Materials, the trilogy written by Philip Pullman. The Golden Compass was widely praised for its visual effects, deeming it both an Academy Award and BAFTA. Although Kidman originally rejected the role stating she did not want to play a villain, she accepted after a personal letter from the director himself.

      Rabbit Hole (2010)

      Premiering at the 2010 Toronto International Film Festival, drama Rabbit Hole features Kidman as actress and producer for the first time. Kidman produced the film with her company, Blossom Films, as an adaptation of the 2005 play of the same title. The world of Becca (Kidman) and Howie Corbett (Aaron Eckhart) is turned upside down following the death of their young son who is killed in a car accident. Once again, Kidman’s performance was critically acclaimed as she earned several nominations including an Oscar, Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild Award.

      The Paperboy (2013)

      Oscar nominated director Lee Daniels of Precious, brings audiences into the deep south of 1960s Florida in upcoming film The Paperboy. The film tells the story of Ward Jansen (Matthew McConaughey) as he comes back to his small town home to investigate a case involving a death row inmate Hillary Van Wetter (John Cusack). With the help of his younger brother Jack (Zac Efron) and sexy death-row groupie Charlotte (Nicole Kidman), Ward and his partner Yardley (David Oyelowo) chase the story of the career as they try to set Van Wetter free, under the belief that he was framed for the murder of a local sheriff. Kidman has already been nominated for a SAG and Golden Globe for her much anticipated performance.

      Like

    • Movies so bad or controversial that they largely ended genuinely thriving acting careers:
      http://www.datalounge.com/cgi-bin/iowa/ajax.html?t=9812306#page:showThread,9812306,3

      “Fur” for Nicole Kidman. She’s never really bounced back from that flop.
      Was that really the first one? The Human Stain, Cold Mountain, The Stepford Wives, Bewitched… all these were made before Fur. I think Kidman holds the record for the longest string of flops… and she’s still in demand!!!

      Meg Ryan never recovered from Proof of Life and In the Cut didn’t exactly help (thought I love Jane and will watch anything she does).

      by: Anonymous reply 49 11/06/2010 @ 02:05PM

      Like

  8. F This Movie!: Doc Hollywood: Nicole Kidman:
    http://www.fthismovie.net/2013/03/doc-hollywood-nicole-kidman_4.html

    Hi, Nicole! Come on in and have a seat.

    How are Keith and the kids? Good?

    OK.OK.OK. Let’s see here…I’m looking at your file, and the news is not good.

    How about this? Instead of futzing around like a couple of Australian schoolgirls, let’s just come out with it, yeah?

    You hit rock bottom. You pissed the Efron. I think you have absolutely no interest in entertaining me. You have also evolved into an actress that is about as fun as cleaning a garage. Why so serious?

    The good news is this can be fixed. You have the tools at your disposal.

    I think my friend Seal said it best when he used to compare you to a kiss from a rose on the gray. I want to get you back to that! You have become the graying tower alone on the sea. The more I get of you, the stranger it feels…yeah.

    First, I want to go back to 1999, because I think this is where your Golden Age began. It was a great year in your career. It was the year of Eyes Wide Shut, which is the perfect cocktail — no Tom Cruise pun intended — of what moviegoers like about you.

    First, let’s state the obvious. Hubba Hubba! You are one of the most strikingly beautiful actresses around. In 1999? A hurricane of pretty. The face, the accent, the tuchus. So pretty it makes my eyes hurt. You were what we Jewish people call Shayna Punim, which means: “Oh! What a face!”

    The cool thing about Eyes Wide Shut was that not only were you great to look at, but you gave a GREAT performance. Not easy to do in one of Stanley Kubrick’s movies, which are normally exemplary in many ways, but you don’t think of the acting first. You came across as fiery, strong, intelligent, vulnerable and likeable. You were interesting and fun to watch. The performance seemed like the reinforcement of the breakout you had in To Die For. You were an actress to be reckoned with, and it was exciting to see where you would go next. Most importantly, it cemented you as very much your own thing. You were no longer just Tom Cruise’s wife who also acts.

    This is also the movie that gave you a newfound cachet in Hollywood. Your next two movies were Moulin Rouge! and The Others, giving you the most financial success of your career. You were just a few years away from winning an Oscar for The Hours in early 2003. This is where your Golden Age ended.

    What followed is going on 10 years of movies that are further and further alienating you from the Nicole Kidman we knew and liked. I lump your post-Oscar output into two categories: Sad Bastard (Dogville, The Human Stain, Birth, Cold Mountain, Rabbit Hole) and The Least Interesting Tentpole in the World (Bewitched, The Golden Compass, The Stepford Wives, The Interpreter, The Invasion). The culmination of this reign of terror found you peeing on Zac Efron’s jellyfish stings in The Paperboy. As David Byrne of The Talking Heads would say, “How did I get here?”

    You seem almost masochistic in wanting us to see you suffer. In turn, you are making your audience’s entertainment genes suffer. This doesn’t have to be the case. We KNOW you can act. You don’t have to be so much of an ACTRESS. Remember Eyes Wide Shut? We got the best of both worlds. The Nicole with acting muscle and Nicole the movie star. The two are not mutually exclusive.

    When your trademarks on IMDB are 1) often plays cold, emotionally vacant characters and 2) has red hair and blue eyes, then you know it’s gotten really bad. In summation, no one wants to see your blockbuster movies because they suck (which has hurt your ‘movie’ pull) and no one wants to see your art house ‘films’ because it’s all grief porn. You are an actress at sea, without a paddle.

    So what happened? I looked in your file for clues and came up with some interesting tidbits. You are very self-aware. You were quoted as saying “So if you talk about a box-office career, then I’m a disaster.” Um, change that. Make movies people want to see. You’re too much in it for you. Give a crap about US again. We have to watch this stuff. Practice what you preach when you said “What’s the point of doing something good if nobody’s watching?” It can be ART and still entertaining! Like Eyes Wide Shut and To Die For.

    But here’s where we will unlock the mystery. This is you on Stanley Kubrick: “Stanley Kubrick taught me to believe in myself artistically. He said to me, ‘No, you have to respect your talent, and give it some space, and give it some time.’ Well, you done did that. I’m sorry, Nicole, but I think your mentor might have broken you. If Kubrick were alive…I don’t know…after a while, maybe he would have said “Nicole, these movies you’re picking are kind of the worst. Did I mention I don’t like Shelley Duvall?”

    So where do we go from here? Here’s my prescription:

    1) Go back to basics – You used to be in programmers; not just movies that were trying to reflect the human condition (gag). Be in thrillers again (Malice, Dead Calm) or genre movies (Billy Bathgate, Batman Forever).

    2) Take a back seat – I read you want to work with Steven Spielberg. Make that happen, BUT in a supporting role. It’s ok not to be the leading lady anymore. Take a note from Susan Sarandon; there’s much to be had from a career longevity standpoint by embracing supporting roles.

    3) Work with these directors – You need to work with directors that LOVE and don’t want to PUNISH actors. I see you working well with Paul Thomas Anderson, Ben Affleck, Wes Anderson, David O. Russell and Sofia Coppola. Stay away from Michael Haneke!

    4) Use what you got – Be cold and emotionally vacant! Stoker is a step in the right direction, and I can’t wait to see you in it. The femme fatale thing worked for you in To Die For. Give that another shot. You could be a big star in horror movies – call James Wan, Ti West or Lucky McKee. Better yet, do a remake of What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? with you in the Joan Crawford part and Winona Ryder in the Bette Davis role. Have David Lynch or Darren Aronofsky direct. That would be a Saturday night hit at the movies!

    5) Play it safe for a while – Remember the movie Wild Hogs? You need a Wild Hogs (Wild Hens?). Let’s get that stick out of your ass. You can even bring the Diet Coke version of you (Naomi Watts) along for the ride. Another option is to call up your pal Daniel Craig and get a villainess role in a Bond movie. Call Kathryn ‘Boom Boom’ Bigelow and blow some sh*t up. Just don’t run in that movie. I’ve seen you run in The Peacemaker, and it looks stupid.

    Ok, I think that’s about all I have for you my friend.

    Oh, real quick. I read something interesting that I have to ask you about. You’re scared of butterflies? You once said you were because there is something “eerie” about them; something weird.

    That’s hilarious! If only Alfred Hitchcock were still alive.

    I’m not teasing. Hell, I’m afraid of homeless people.

    Take care, Nicole, and good luck. My office is open for you anytime.

    Like

  9. Reading LeBeau’s final summarization towards why Nicole Kidman’s career went south, what’s kind of interesting is that I theorized the same sort of thing around here towards why Elisabeth Shue couldn’t keep up her post-“Leaving Las Vegas” momentum. Both kept making “artsy” movies that most people weren’t interested in seeing. And when they did make more mainstream friendly movies (in Elisabeth’s case, “The Saint” and Hollow Man”), they were huge, embarrassing failures.

    It’s always going to be debatable if Nicole wouldn’t have gotten as far as she did w/o being married to Tom Cruise. I mean, as LeBeau pointed out, Nicole’s own box office credibility was out to the test when she became known as the “Queen of the Bad Remake” (i.e. “Bewitched”, “The Stepford Wives”, and “The Invasion”).

    I really think that Nicole’s cosmetic procedures (which of course, contributed to the decline of Meg Ryan’s career) at this point (Nicole arguably looked her hottest around the time she made “Batman Forever”), makes it very hard to make more marketable or accessible.

    I said in LeBeau’s Facebook page that I’ve have what I consider the “Zac Efron theory”. That is, the moment that you star in a movie w/ Zac Efron (based on past WTHHT and incidentally, Batman leading ladies Kim Basinger and Michelle Pfeiffer in “Charlie St. Cloud” and “New Year’s Eve” respectively), that’s the biggest indicator that your days as a top star are on the wane. This is kind of similar to LeBeau’s own theory regarding actresses like Kathleen Turner and Melanie Griffith appearing in John Waters directed movies.

    Like

  10. Wow. What a badly written article. Nicole Kidman is probably the best actress working these days. She was amazing in The Paperboy, Rabbit Hole, Margot at the Wedding, Birth, Stoker, The Hours, Cold Mountain, The Others, Moulin Rouge, Dogville, Birthday Girl, To Die For…

    Who cares about box-office? Her career is so obviously not about that. I prefer an actress who takes artistic chances than someone who plays the same role over and over again and only gives dumb teenagers what they want (action! action! action!) like her ex, Tom Cruise.

    Kidman has an Oscar, she got her latest Oscar nomination a couple of years ago, she was the biggest star of the Cannes Film Festival last year, she will probably be in Steven Spielberg’s jury at the festival this year, Harvey Weinstein just bought the rights to her next movie, she still works with the best directors.

    An article like that should be about Julia Roberts, Renee Zellwegger, Angelina Jolie or Cameron Diaz. Not about Nicole Kidman, that’s ridiculous.

    Like

    • Hi Gizmo. See my response to Ian.

      Don’t let the title of the series fool you. I have a lot of respect for Kidman’s career. Everything you pointed on in your comment was included in the article.

      Again, it’s fine to disagree. The comments section in these articles is always very lively. But there’s no need to be rude.

      I have written up Zellweger. The others you mentioned will be included eventually.

      Like

      • Where am I rude here? I’m just commenting on what you wrote.

        You obviously don’t have any respect for Nicole Kidman’s career. And you don’t seem to have much respect for older actresses in general.

        Kidman is 45 year-old and she works with the best directors in the world, she’s very respected in the movie industry, why would you write an article like that? Why do you talk as if she is some kind of has-been when, in FACT, she got an Oscar nomination two years ago, her latest movie is directed by Chan Wook Park and her next movie is produced by Harvey Weinstein (a movie in which she has the leading role by the way)? Why don’t you acknowledge all that? Why would you say “what the hell happened to Nicole Kidman?” as if her career was over. That’s just ridiculous.

        It seems like box office is the only thing that matters to you.
        You talk at length about The Stepford Wives and Bewitched and Just Go with It, as if those crappy movies define her career. You do realize that this woman has worked with people like Lars Von Trier, Stanley Kubrick, Jane Campion or Gus Van Sant?

        My question is : Would you write an article like that about Brad Pitt or Sean Penn? There are the male equivalents of Kidman. Of course, you wouldn’t. Kidman is 45 and that’s just too much for some people. A 45 year-old WOMAN can’t have a great career, can’t be successful, can’t be “A-list”. And even if she is, let’s pretend she’s not. Let’s not give her the credit and respect she deserves.

        And you are right, very few actresses maintain successful careers in their forties. And that’s because of people like you, who take great pleasure in posting before/after pictures and refuse to acknowledge women’s achievements (look at the way you make fun of the awards nominations Kidman has received over the years).

        Like

        • Starting your comment with “Wow. What a badly written article.” is rude where I come from. Is that how you start conversations? With insults?

          What is your basis for saying I don’t have respect for Kidman or older actresses in general? Please back this opinion up.

          It seems to me like you are having a bad reaction to the title. So let me clarify. As you have probably noticed, this article is part of a series.

          The series started out dealing with A-list actors who had pretty much disappeared. The scope has gradually expanded I will now cover actors who never made the A-list or actors who have had their careers slow down for some reason.

          Despite the mild profanity in the title, I don’t consider it an insult to be covered in a WTHH article. I consider it a compliment. Everyone I have written about has accomplished something extraodrinary. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be writing about them.

          Is there some snark? You betcha. But it’s all in fun. I would hate for these articles to turn into A&E Biography where only the victories are spotlighted.

          If I thought box office was everything, I would just list box office totals and be done with it. If I thought Kidman was defined by her failures, I wouldn’t have covered her successes. I don’t know what you are complaining about. I mentioned every movie and director you listed and then some.

          Would I write an article like this about Brad Pitt or Sean Penn? Of course I would. Pitt is still a bit too popular to be a candidate for WTHH. But his day will come. I’ll cover Sean Penn sooner.

          If you look at previous articles, you will see I typically alternate genders. Admittedly, male actors tend to stay in the spotlight longer. I have commented on that many times. But that’s society, not me.

          People like me? You don’t know me. Again, is this what you consider polite conversation?

          Because I included a single before/after picture? I’d be remiss if I didn’t. Google “Nicole Kidman plastic surgery”. She has clearly been under the knife for years. I could write an entire article of nothing but botox jokes. That’s a reality. It’s part of her career. So I addressed it. If anything, I played it down.

          But then you are upset because I made a joke about how many Golden Globe nominations she received? That’s a GOOD thing!

          Seems to me like you are just looking for things to be offended about. Calm down a little and we can talk when you’re less emotional.

          Like

        • That’s tellin’ ’em!

          Like

        • I rarely have to break out my post-fu, but it is strong. Whether people agree with me or not, I will treat them with respect. But if you come into “my house” and start throwing around insults, the gloves come off. 😉

          Like

      • “IMO” your piece is badly written. But you certainly seem to have a very high opinion of yourself. You think it’s a compliment to be included in your “articles”? How hilarious.

        So you think Kidman’s career slowed down? How so? An Oscar nomination a couple of years ago is nothing? Working with Chan Wook Park is nothing? Getting great reviews for her performances in Rabbit Hole, The Paperboy and Stoker, having her movies being selected at the most prestigious film festivals in the world, getting the part of Grace Kelly in a movie produced by Harvey Weinstein…Again, why are you saying her career slowed down? Because she’s “old”? Because you don’t think she’s beautiful or sexy anymore?

        Most of your articles are about actresses over 40 so you obviously have a problem with women getting older.

        And Kidman was NEVER a big box-office draw, it’s ridiculous that you are trying to pretend otherwise. Her career is not about box-office, that’s why she’s completely free artistically. She’s a respected actress. Like Cate Blanchett, Kate Winslet or Julianne Moore.

        But whatever. If you don’t realize how stupid it sounds to say “what the hell happened to Nicole Kidman”, you really have a problem.

        Like

        • Okay, you didn’t like the article. You have made that pretty clear. You haven’t really backed it up at all. Makes it a little tricky to take your criticism very seriously when all it amounts to is “I don’t like it”.

          I explained why I feel it’s complimentary to be written up. It has nothing to do with my ego. It’s a sign that the subject has accomplished something. You have to understand that. You’re just being argumentative.

          Where did I say an Oscar nomination is nothing? All of your arguments consist of putting words in my mouth. That’s hard to pull off when my words are there for everyone to read.

          I have already explained how Kidman’s career has slowed down. She went from starring in major Hollywood movies to supporting roles and smaller films. If you disagree, please provide a counter argument.

          I’m not even going to dignify your comments about whether or not I think Kidman is sexy. What’s that got to do with anything? Oh right. You are trying to smear me.

          Most of my articles are not about women over 40. The majority are about people over 40 because they cover a career. Roughly 1/2 of the articles are about men and some of the women are under 40.

          If her career was not about box office as you claim, she never would have made big budget dreck like Stepford Wives, Bewitched, etc. I have given her credit repeatedly for making some daring choices in her career. But saying that box office isn’t part of the equation is foolish.

          So as I expected, it all comes back to the title. Yeah, I have a problem all right.

          This has stopped being fun. All you are doing as throwing around ridiculous accusations without backing any of them up.

          If you are going to continue telling me how sexist I am, I’m done with you. If you can carry on a conversation and back up your points, I’m here.

          Like

      • Hmmm…”Gizmo?” or “Stripe,” maybe?

        Like

  11. @ Terrence Michael Clay – You obviously greatly dislike Nicole Kidman. You also seem totally obsessed with her.

    Like

  12. This is easily my favorite blog, and if I ever get around to creating the movie review blog that I have been planning for oh 20 years now, this blog will serve as the inspiration for my blog.
    But it’s been more fun to hang out here 🙂
    The WTHH series is well done and gives an overview for each actor or actress. Keep in mind that there is no such thing as an overview that can include everything, especially when discussing lengthy careers. So the blog writer makes decisions along the way so that it isn’t 100 pages. There is also no reason to expect any blog host to be completely unbiased, they are allowed to have their own take on things. People are certainly free to add information in the comments, i think Lebeau has shown himself to be remarkably tolerant of a wide range of opinions.

    Like

    • Thanks, RB. You’re too kind.

      I look at Le Blog as a party I’m hosting. Everyone’s invited. We can joke around. Pretty much anything goes. Disagreement is encouraged as long as it’s civil. I’m like anyone else. I am frequently wrong. Lots of times, commentors have changed my mind about something.

      I’m more than willing to own up to mistakes. And I’m glad when commenters point them out for me. I like to think the articles are always improving. I do go back and add to the articles when I come across new information.

      End of the day, yeah, it’s my blog. I’m going to toss in my two cents. I try to do it in a fun way. If I didn’t these articles would just be a long IMDB entry with a little Rotten Tomatoes and Box Office Mojo thrown in. Informative, maybe, but not a very fun read.

      Let me know when/if you start that blog of yours. I’d love to read it.

      Like

  13. Don’t pay any attention to that ian retard, I thought it was a good article. I really liked Dead Calm and Far and Away, those were the high points of Kidman’s career, in my opinion. Keep up the good work.

    Like

    • Hey, SD. Long time no see. How’s things? I haven’t seen you post in a while so I was wondering what was going on.

      Dead Calm is a great suspense flick. I was lukewarm on Far and Away. But I loved To Die For.

      I’ll take the good with the bad. Can’t please everyone. I think these guys followed a link over from the IMDB forums. They are extremely rude over there.

      Like

  14. New job and just bought my first home….very, very busy. But I still read all of your articles.

    One thing to consider, responses mean people are paying attention.

    Like

  15. Was Billy Zane ever A-list? What happened to him?

    Like

  16. I’d say both “The Phantom” & his annoying performance in “Titanic” ended Zane’s tenure on the A-list before it even began. At least we still have “Dead Calm” & his small role as one of Biff’s cronies in the “Back to the Future” series.

    On another note, “Eyes Wide Shut” was interesting, but I think it would’ve been better if Kidman had been in it more.

    Like

    • I didn’t find Zane annoying in Titanic per se. I certainly hated his character. It probably killed any chance he had of being a leading man in the eyes of a certain generation of young girls.

      I enjoyed Eyes Wide Shut quite a bit and thought it was (and still is) under-rated.

      Like

      • I went to EWS on opening night and just felt like the presence of 2 of the biggest stars in the world brought in a lot of people who weren’t going to have the patience for Kubrick’s brand of storytelling. I heard lots of complaints and asked those complaining if they’d seen anything else by Kubrick. Most of them looked at me blankly. A couple of them said “who’s that?”

        Like

        • When I saw it, I was the only person in the theater. But I had similar conversations with people trying to warn me not to “waste my time”. WB did the movie several disservices. Obviously with the censorship. But also the marketing. The made the movie look like Basic Instinct 2. Kubrick deals in sexuality, but his movies have never been a turn on.

          Like

        • It was the subject matter. Why on Earth make a movie from some 1920’s Austrian novella with a Freud fetish?
          It wasn’t a deep look at someone’s sexuality- it wasn’t all that erotic and the plot was a bit bleh.

          Like

        • I give Kidman credit for seeking out difficult material. It allowed her to be a darling of the indie scene while also being a major A-list star. But more often than not, those projects were noble failures. Still, points for swinging for the fences. But in the end, it probably hurt her mainstream career.

          I think the real issue was that her mainstream movies during the peak of her popularity ranged from mediocre to awful. The Stepford Wives and Bewitched are hard to come back from. Toss in The Invasion and it’s game over.

          Like

  17. This is what I don’t like about all those “so and so was considered stories”. It’s possible Wright was considered because Kidman was busy doing something else. Or was deemed too expensive. Certainly, Kidman was the bigger star at the time.

    Just like in Batman Returns, Annette Benning was originally cast as Catwoman but had to drop out due to pregnancy. Pfeiffer who later got the role was a bigger star than Benning. But she was not the first choice.

    Like

  18. I wouldn’t say I disliked it. But I did laugh at it a lot. A whole lot. I get the impression the movie was meant to be a satire. I remember guessing plot points way before they materialized.

    I haven’t seen it since it was in theaters, so I will have to give it a second look.

    Like

  19. You have convinced me to lift my Sandler ban and give Just Go With It a try some time. I am extremely skeptical. But, we’ll see.

    Stepford Wives is truly terrible. The reshoots caused the movie to make no sense. Read no further if you want to avois spoilers.

    In the original movie, it was revealed that the men of the town were replacing their wives with lifelike robots. The remake hinted at the same with the wives doing things only robots could do including sparking. But at the end, it is revealed that somehow they are not really robots. Which makes no sense given everything we have seen up to that point.

    Like

    • Bad Movie Beatdown: Just Go With It:

      Film Brain has to watch this dismal remake of a farce, that’s more like watching Adam Sandler’s Hawaiian vacation footage – glad he’s having so much fun at least… Contains strong language and moderate sex references. This work is protected by Fair Use.

      Like

      • Film “Brain” is certainly entitled to his opinion. Just Go With It was my go-to watch for at least a half dozen viewings during a dismal work phase. And I will happily watch anyone’s Hawaii vacation footage. I’m weird that way!

        Like

        • One thing about the Film Brain review and Nicole Kidman’s appearance in “Just Go With It” is the argument or notion that by that point in time, she was actually considered too much “box office poison” (how and why such a case was made in that regard is up for endless debate), that she wasn’t even (despite being an Academy Award winning actress, w/ a relatively sizable role in the movie and not just a mere walk on cameo) featured all that much (if at all) in the promotional material.

          Like

        • I think that’s pretty standard prcedure for Sandler movies. Didn’t Pacino do more or less the same thing in Jack and Jill?

          Like

        • Now as for why exactly Nicole Kidman is now a days, generally considered to be “box office poison”:
          http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000173/board/flat/218391646?p=1

          *It could be the feeling that Nicole overall has an iciness about her, which gives her a bit of an unlikable about her.

          *Nicole has a huge taste for art house fare that are more than often, about as far removed from mainstream movie making as you can get. The bottom-line is that actresses or actors who make lots of boutique movies may thrill their hardcore fans, but they’ll more than likely lose the power of mainstream appeal in the process.

          Like

        • One thing that was left out in Nicole Kidman’s WTHHT when it came to discussing “The Golden Compass” is that it for all intents and purposes killed (or was the final nail in the coffin so to speak) New Line Cinema as a stand alone film company:
          http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CreatorKiller

          The failure of The Golden Compass in the US, along with other films released in 2007, led Time Warner to absorb New Line Cinema into Warner Bros. proper in 2008. Today, New Line exists as a division of Warner Bros. Pictures, mainly releasing films based on their properties. What’s worse is that they could have avoided it all by not selling off the foreign distribution rights, which contributed to 80% of the film’s earnings.

          To put things into a more proper perspective:
          The Golden Compass (2007) — Budget, $180 million. Box office, $70 million (domestically), $372,234,864 (internationally). Unfortunately, New Line Cinema had sold off the international distribution rights in order to raise enough money for the film’s production, meaning that they only got the domestic gross, and never saw a penny of the international box office. As a result, New Line was absorbed into Warner Bros soon after.

          Like

        • The Golden Compass: what went wrong?

          http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/the-golden-compass/245625/the-golden-compass-what-went-wrong

          With fantasy franchises having been so popular in recent years, why did Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials series stop before it got going?

          A much beloved trilogy of fantasy novels, Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials was much praised for its rich, imaginative fantasy world, nuanced and ambiguous characters and powerful anti-religious themes. Critically acclaimed, award-laden bestsellers with a young heroine in the form of Lyra Bellacqua, the trilogy seemed an obvious choice to follow Harry Potter and Lord Of The Rings and become a blockbuster movie series.

          New Line bought the rights after bringing Lord Of The Rings to the screen, hoping for a similar success. The two stories are very different High Fantasies though, and The Golden Compass contains concepts less familiar to audiences than wizards, monsters and swordplay. His Dark Materials was also occasionally categorized in shops as a children’s book, unlike Lord Of The Rings.

          This is an important factor when it comes to the adaptation. Say something is for children and for a lot of people you automatically impose limitations on what it can be. Consider how many times ‘for kids’ is used as a derogatory term, even if that means you have to ignore the sheer abundance of brilliant stories that match that description.

          It’s self-perpetuating in many ways. So long as products for children have an air of complacency and simplicity their superiors will be tarred with the same brush, lending children’s films a reputation that means some creators feel they don’t have to try so hard.

          The Golden Compass is one of those movies that taints other children’s films by virtue of being compromised by an adult’s idea of what children can cope with. With its unique aspects neutered it becomes an anemic dirge at times, with exposition as subtle as a Michael Bay in the face. One character literally flies in just to explain a plot point before immediately leaving again.

          Derek Jacobi almost salvages lines such as “If we can save our children from the corrupting influence of dust…” but ultimately can’t do anything to stop it sounding like a line from Brass Eye. Christopher Lee is brought in to say a new line by New Line, whose own dust-strewn fingers are all over the final edit and some of the casting. Ian McKellen was also brought on board to have a fight with Lovejoy, but like the rest of the film it was a bloodless affair.

          With Chris Weitz both writing and directing, you’d be forgiven for thinking he should take the bulk of the blame, especially when he chose not to use a draft by renowned playwright (and Star Wars prequels dialogue polisher – yes, I know) Tom Stoppard. Weitz, having co-wrote and directed About a Boy, seemed a sensible choice after producing a seemingly light film punctuated by moments of melancholy and darkness, and got the job after making an unsolicited pitch.

          Daniel Craig was cast well, as were Nicole Kidman and Sam Elliott. The child actors are occasionally guilty of being child actors, though it feels harsh to criticise them at all when their dialogue has the ring of a production enclave asking ‘but are we sure people will get that Lyra’s feisty and intelligent?’

          The end result is dialogue telling us that Lyra is special in a film that doesn’t always remember to show us the same thing. This is partly down to a studio imposed running time of two hours, cutting around an hour from Weitz’ first draft. This came despite Harry Potter being successful with lengthier running times. Plus, you’d have thought that the studio who made Lord Of The Rings would have more faith. But faith was another issue altogether.

          Weitz trod lightly around the religious aspects of Pullman’s books, but still found himself having to remove even mentions of ‘sin’ from the script, leaving an important part of the story flailing amid woolly and ridiculous euphemisms. He left the project – replaced temporarily by Anand Tucker (Red Riding, Indian Summer) who himself then left over creative differences – before Weitz returned to finish the movie he’d started.

          According to Vulture, the faults of the film do not lie with Weitz. He apparently turned in a more faithful draft than Stoppard, whose script was apparently less about Lyra and more about meetings (according to a Philip Pullman interview with The Atlantic which is well worth a read).

          While only a hint of the religious subtext was left in that script, much of what made Weitz’ first draft work was cut to bring down that running time. Actor Tom Courtenay confirmed that his role was drastically reduced in post-production, with the studio editing the full-length version down, removing its original ending and staging reshoots to exposit information now lost.

          Ultimately there were problems as a result of religious pressure and the studio being unwilling to risk wrath (wrath that would probably have descended on them at any rate), but this was far from unsalvageable. What really killed the film off it seems was the drive to get it under two hours, and the ensuing studio-imposed reworking of the movie. In short, it feels more like a bullet point list of things half remembered from the book than an actual film.

          And we come back full circle a little here. The change in running time came because of a limited notion of what a children’s movie can be, and what a younger audience can cope with. It’s even more obvious in hindsight with the raft of Young Adult adaptations that the audience could have coped with a three hour long version of The Golden Compass with its bleak finale, had New Line opted to go that way.

          It’s hard to imagine a film in a New Line trilogy ending at a point that leaves the next film with a flapping tendril of leftover story, I know, but that’s what happened in 2007: the finale of The Golden Compass was to be left over for the next film in the series, based on the book The Subtle Knife.

          Obviously this film never came to pass, and we have two books unfilmed. Is this a bad thing? I’d argue that it is not.

          Harry Potter had to leave out a lot of details from the books over its eight films, but His Dark Materials are books that are trying to do different things, richer still in just three novels, and so there’s an inevitable loss of nuance even in a good film adaptation.

          There’s no need to adapt every single remotely popular story, as if things don’t exist until they’re moving pictures on a screen, so if there’s going to be an exception, it’s good that it’s something that rewards multiple readings. That uses prose to tell stories more effectively than cutting edge CGI even could.

          Meanwhile, at New Line, the additional shoot and post-production on The Golden Compass not only increased the cost of the film, but stopped it from being good enough to recover costs. Indeed, it contributed to a financial situation at New Line that required a surefire hit from one of their properties, and lo: Peter Jackson was brought back onboard, and The Hobbit began to happen.

          Like

  20. Please keep doing more of WTHH posts. They are interesting and funny at the same time! You also might want to add a What the Hell Were They Thinking? note on some of the movies 🙂

    Like

  21. Zinnia Andrews

    There are some facts in the article on Nicole Kidman, but the Church of Scientology had nothing to do with her marriage to Tom Cruise or anyone. The church does not arrange marriages for its parishioners: in that department, your’re on your own.!

    Like

    • I have no first-hand experience with Schientology. So I’m not forming an opinion one way or another. I’m just providing information I came across in my research. Based on what I have read about Scientology, I find the stories credible. But bottom line I have no idea what really happened.

      Like

    • I feel sorry for him. He sounds like a messed up kid who got indocternated into a cult at a young age when he was vulnerable. They have warped him to the point where he can’t recognize reality. That video of him at a Scientology function set up to honor him says all I need to know:

      Holy shit, he’s crazy! Having Cruise leave her was probably the best thing that ever happened to Kidman.

      Like

    • lol

      She should have ran the hell out of there like Katie Holmes.

      Like

  22. I just have to comment on Fur – it’s actually best known (or at least meant to be) as a ‘reimagination’ (or something similar) of the photographer Diane Arbus – resulting in many puzzled hipsters sitting through Fur and desperately trying to like it.

    I didn’t enjoy it either, but I suspect it’s a film you’re supposed to know about before watching rather than just happen upon it and see Kidman shave Robert Downey jr. All over.

    And since I’m posting – thanks for all the articles, have enjoyed them all and especially Chevy Chase’s today (i don’t care whatever mistakes he’s done – he did Fletch and the Griswald films!) but maybe spank your spell-checker and change Jane Curtain to Curtin.

    Suggestions: Garies Sinise and Busey.

    Oh, and nice handling with the nonsensical Gizmo – Kidman’s ginger hair sure can turn some of us a bit loopy.

    Like

  23. This one got lively didn’t it? Kidman has always struck me as one of those rare A list’ers who made the A list with their smaller, quieter, indy type roles. As opposed to the films she was in that were meant to be blockbusters ala Batman, Bewitched and Peacemaker. I actually own Peacemaker on DVD and think it’s a pretty good flick though so for me it was successful. Anyway as has been mentioned she has consistently picked riskier, non-formulaic roles and has shone quite well in them. I admire that. Not too many big time actors made their name this way.

    As for that before and after pic I thought it was actually a joke w/ the before being Kidman and the after being Daryl Hanna! It wasn’t until reading through the comments section I figured out the after pic is actually Kidman. 😮 Ug…not pretty. I hope things have settled since that photo was taken. Finally I will say that several of the WTHHT subjects are basically has-beens at this point, but she still seems to be going strong. So I can see where people might be confused about why she’s included in this series. I’m not too sure she was ever in the stratosphere like Julia Roberts anyway was she? I always looked at her as a solid, working actress. Maybe I’m wrong about that.

    Like

    • Yeah, things got a little interesting. I was fully prepared for some Scientologists to come in here and yell at me. I didn’t see the IMDB reading me the riot act.

      Kidman doesn’t fit the classic WTHH profile. I said in the article, she’s still active. But I think the question is still valid and here’s why.

      As you point out, Kidman was never as big of a box office draw as Julia Roberts or Sandra Bullock. But she was a huge celebrity thanks to her marriage to Cruise. Following Moulin Rouge and The Others, it looked like she might be stepping up to the big leagues. But then, she went on a streak of high profile disasters.

      Also, if you are a casual movie goer, there is a perception tha Kidman has gone away. She’s moving into more supporting roles in smaller movies mainstream audiences aren’t familiar with. Some movies, like Trespass and Stoker, are bypassing theaters in a lot of markets.

      This isn’t surprising. It’s the way of things in Hollywood for middle aged actresses, sadly. The same can be said of plastic surgery which Kidman has engaged in extensively. The internet is full of similar pictures of Kidman before and after procedures.

      Like

  24. I only looked at IMDb message boards once, quite a while ago, and it was not worth a return visit. Too many people with limited keyboard and conversational skills. In a blog like this one, the columns are great, the comments are fun to read and there are links to other interesting blogs. If I were you Lebeau I wouldn’t give those 2 posters a second thought. In fact you’re nicer than me, I’d have deleted their posts.

    Like

    • I don’t really venture into the IMDB forums very often. They are filled with trolls. No thanks. But when I started getting so many rude comments, I checked the site stats and sure enough people were clicking over from the Nicole Kidman forum. I knew right away what had happened.

      As a rule, I won’t delete pots just because they disagree with me. I like to keep things open. I will only delete or modify a comment if I feel like I have no choice.

      Most of the time when commentors are critical one of two things happens. Either they go away and never come back. Or they see that I am willing to engage in a reasonable conversation. When that happens, we usually come to some kind of accord even if it is just agreeing to disagree.

      I’ve got pretty thick skin. A couple of negative posters aren’t going to bother me in the least. In the end, the ones who are just being argumentative always end up making themselves look foolish.

      Like

  25. With Nicole Kidman’s entry, I think officially, all of the top billed actresses (Kim Basinger, Michelle Pfeiffer, Uma Thurman, and Alicia Silverstone) to have appeared in the Tim Burton-Joel Schumacher (1989-1997) Batman film series have received a “What the Hell Happened to…” retrospective.

    I thought that it was weird the Joel Schumacher apparently had an issue w/ Rene Russo playing Val Kilmer’s love interest in “Batman Forever” because she’s about five years older than him in real life. Yet, Nicole Kidman is about eight years younger than Val Kilmer (talk about a double standard). I guess, Bruce Wayne shouldn’t be allowed to be dating cougars. Plus, wasn’t a bit of a precedent set already in the previous Superman film series w/ Margot Kidder (Lois Lane) in real life being several years older than Christopher Reeve.

    Like

    • Of the major Bat-actors of the 80’s-90s, all that remain are Clooney, O’Donnell, Carrey, Jones, DeVito and Nicholson. They will be coming soon.

      I don’t really blame Schumacher for the double standard. That’s just how Hollywood works. Also, Kilmer looked young. Russo looked older next to him. It was probably the right call to make.

      Like

      • If you’ve seen my posts in Eddie Murphy’s WTHHT comments section, you should be quite aware that I’ve been pushing for Jim Carrey to get a WTHHT down the line (at the very least, he should be the next Batman film alumnus to get one if ever).

        Like

        • I’m sort of waiting to see if KA2 gives his career a bump. I don’t think it will, but you never know. I am pretty confident he will be getting the WTHH treatment before the end of the year.

          Like

    • Does anyone else recall a little snark when Top Gun was in theatres, about Kelly McGinnis seeming a little too old to play a love interest for Tom Cruise?

      Like

      • Oh sure. I was Mad Magazine-reading age at the time. And they made a joke about McGillis’ age every page.

        Which reminds me… did anyone see Tom Cruise on the Daily Show last week? He was promoting Oblivion and Jon Stewart asked him about the friendships he’s made with co-stars over the years. Cruise says that he becomes friends with them while they are making the movie, then they go their separate ways and when they see each other again they pick up exactly where they left off.

        Stewart says something like, “Except for one guy.” And you can tell, Cruise knows exactly who he’s talking about. He kind of chuckles in that Tom Cruise robot way. Then he decides to play along and says, “Yeah, but no one wants to talk to him.” They HAD to be talking about Val Kilmer. Loved it!

        Like

  26. After reading “Disclosure” when it came out, like anyone i had ideas who would be perfect for the movie leads. While Demi Moore did fine as the unethical corporate exec, Meredith, I thought Nicole Kidman would have been absolutely perfect. Meredith in the book was portrayed as a successful, beautiful but calculating blonde bombshell.

    Like

  27. Well, I like Kidman and I think she’s versatile, but i’m not a fully kidmaniac like ian and ginzo. I agree letableau with some points -with clear differences-

    *First of all, yes Harvey makes Oscar bait, but remember, not always is right -Nine, W,E,, Grace is Gone- There’s still the big possibility of failure in Grace of Monaco -Albeit it could also make sucess-.
    *The return of the frozen faces comments
    *While I think Kidman is a versatile actress, I recognize she needs box office hits. Why? Because it means trust.
    *Before I Go to Sleep is a Millenium Film-

    Albeit I think Kidman is still an A-list by name, her leading career is cooling off.

    Like

    • And last, i’m neutral of this situation. I hate the detractors but also the crazy fans.

      Like

      • I’m pro-reason. Have whatever opinion you want. Just be prepared to back it up and have a civil discourse.

        I understand that the title of the series can put fans on the defensive. But there’s no need to come out swinging. I’m more than willing to hear out all sides. And if I made a mistake, let me know. It won’t be the first time I have gone back and fixed something. (As you well know!) 😉

        Like

    • I am back and forth on the idea that Kidman is A-list. On the one hand, there aren’t a lot of actresses in Hollywood who are bigger. Among her age group, she is among the biggest stars in Hollywood today. The younger actresses may be getting bigger movies, but are they stars? I don’t know.

      On the other hand, Kidman is not a box office draw. And I think that is key to being true “A-list”.

      Some around here have argued that there is no A-list any more. And to a certain degree, that’s probably true. If there is an A-list, being on it means less than it used to.

      Like

        • Kidman is still “A-list” to the extent that there is one. But she is not a box office draw. By the strictest definition of A-list (which no longer applies) Kidman is not A-list. But then, almost no one is.

          Like

        • 12 Actors Who Basically Guarantee You Make A Flop:
          http://whatculture.com/film/12-actors-basically-guarantee-make-flop.php/12

          1. Nicole Kidman

          Nicole Kidman’s movies have made a combined total of over $3 billion worldwide, but would you believe that, these days, casting in her in a movie is a sure recipe for a failure? Let’s look at her recent successes first: The Interpreter, Bewitched, Happy Feet (animated), Australia and Just Go With It (sold on Adam Sandler and Jennifer Aniston).

          Her failures? The Stepford Wives, Birth, The Invasion, Margot at the Wedding, The Golden Compass (her biggest commercial disappointment), Nine, Rabbit Hole, Trespass, The Paperboy, Stoker, The Railway Man and Grace of Monaco.

          Why Is She A Flop? She’s beautiful, she’s a great actress, she has a commanding leading lady presence, and yet, she just can’t seem to catch a break. In fairness, the likes of The Railway Man, The Paperboy and Rabbit Hole were clearly conscious artistic choices rather than commercial ones, but she’s had 5 flops in a row now, and with her next effort Before I Go to Sleep looking to be a low-key limited release, it’ll probably be six. Still, the release of Paddington near the end of the year will almost certainly break the streak, if only temporarily.

          Kidman’s gravitation towards flops seems to be a mixture of her ambition leading her to more artistically-minded projects and some really bad luck: who would have expected movies like The Stepford Wives, The Invasion, The Golden Compass, Nine and Grace of Monaco to flop? On paper, they all should’ve been big hits.

          Like

  28. i had read an earlier lebeau post on what defines A list. It was a good discussion and yes, the lines are not necessarily clear. Back in the day of a few major studios, like in the 40s and 50s, they each had their own actors and actresses who were either A or B list. Now it most commonly seems to mean an A list star is someone who can open a movie on the strength of their name, and who enjoys the corresponding clout to get the movies made in the first place. i’ve also heard that Oscar winners are permanent A list. so it could be an actor from back in the day was A list and some audiences today not be familiar with their work. mostly though if they can open a movie today they have tremendous name recognition and by both counts niciole kidman is A list all the way.

    Like

    • The idea of a permanent a-list is forgein to me. Especially in the case of Oscar winners. In the last several years, Oscar seems to be a career curse. It is practically a guarantee that an actor’s time on the A-list is coming to an end.

      I’m going to have to look into this idea of “permanent A-list” to see how widespread it is. Seems very counter intuitive to me. But perhaps my perspective is warped since I spend so much time dealing with actors who are no longer on the fabled list.

      Like

  29. I might be totally screwing this up, too. And I totally see your point. If the name recognition is there but they are no longer a bankable star, are they really A list?

    It also might be inaccurate what i wrote about the days of the studio system. i do remember reading, (ages ago) before there were all these independent studios, there used to be a handful of major studios that also controlled distribution of their movies. They used this to their advantage to sell some lesser quality “B” movies as part of a package with their big budget, big star “A” movies. Maybe that’s where the terminology originated but I have no idea really.

    Like

    • This is a topic I always want to address more than I do because I think it is central to the WTHH series. I think everyone can agree on what A-list used to mean. in the 80s, it was pretty obvious who was A-list and who wasn’t. But these days, you can make a legit argument that there is no such thing anymore.

      Especially when you are talking about actresses. Who is a legit box office draw these days? Meryl Streep. I’m not sure Julia Roberts or Sandra Bullock draw crowds any more. If you start naming A-list actresses, you will hear Nicole Kidman, Jodie Foster, Reese Witherspoon, etc. But are they really A-list or are they just the last remnants of a time when being an A-list actress meant something?

      If you look at the younger generation of actresses, you have Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Jessica Chastain,
      Amanda Seyfried… It’s a steep drop off after that. Are any of them box office draws?

      Another key component is being able to get a movie greenlit. I think a lot of the actresses I named can get a relatively cheap independent film made. But how many can get a big budget tentpole movie made? Angelina Jolie comes to mind.

      “A-list” is a term that means something different to everyone. I think a lot of people just use it to mean that the actor is repected or a personal favorite. And that’s legit. But when I use the term, I’m really talking about two kinds of power; power at the box office and power at the studio.

      Like

  30. Nicole Kidman is an interesting case. I used to like her once, but since “Moulin Rouge”, a movie that i really disliked, she has chosen a lot of weird projects. However she may not be a big draw in the US anymore, but overseas her popularity is still very high. It’s an interesting fact that her star power is still very high in Europe but not anymore in the US. I think we can say that Nicole is still an A-List as a worldwide star, though she’s not an A-List anymore in the US

    Like

    • I did notice that she has been pretty consistent over-seas. Call it the Peacemaker factor.

      That is becoming more and more important these days. Foreign box office is what keeps Nicolas Cage in business.

      Like

  31. I loved this article! Do you believe Nicole Kidman could ever have the older age careers of Meryl Streep, Susan Sarandon, or Glenn Close? Or has her surgeries prevented her from doing that and being seen seriously. Meryl Streep could have been once considered as a candidate for the WTHH series but she bounced back with roles meant for older women. Maybe Kidman could bounce back but from the pictures of Grace Monaco, I don’t know if she will. Those older actors are A listers although they are way past 45.

    But then Meryl Streep is very low key with almost little to no scandals. Same with Glenn Close. Susan Sarandon was a little wilder, but they didn’t have their personal life paid more attention to than their acting. And people will instantly go to their movies because of their acting- not for nudity, the other members of the cast, etc… I can’t remember another actor in Sophie’s Choice BUT Merly Streep. Nicole Kidman’s talents get overshadowed by her marriage to Tom Cruise and her constant botox. And in her recent movies, people are drawn to see them more for the other members of the cast than her.

    Oh and a great candidate would be Adrien Brody! I loved him in The Pianist but ever since then he’s been in some crazy bad movies. He’s a great actor. Keanu Reeves would be good too since he seems like a fixture from the 90s that hasn’t crossed over well to this decade save that one disaster movie where he played an alien.

    Like

    • I’m glad you enjoyed the article!

      I think it is possible Kidman could bounce back and have a late career resurgence like Streep. As you pointed out, Streep’s career stalled out for a while before she reinvented herself as a comedic actress.

      Do I think it will happen? Probably not. It’s extremely rare. I am in awe of Streep’s career and can’t think of any other actress who has done what she has. But it is certainly possible.

      Adrien Brody and Keanu Reeves will be coming soon. I just need to remember to add them to the poll.

      Like

      • Whoa! Whatever Happened to Keanu Reeves?:
        http://frettsonfilm.com/2013/04/26/whoa-whatever-happened-to-keanu-reeves/

        Keanu Reeves once seemed on the verge of an excellent acting adventure, but as he approaches his 50th birthday next year, his cinematic career has mostly turned out to be a bogus journey. He started out as convincingly surly teenagers in films ranging from Tim Hunter’s dark River’s Edge to Ron Howard’s sunny Parenthood. But the dude-speak intonations that served him so well in the Bill & Ted movies started to limit his range, as he seemed wildly out of place (and time) in period pieces like Dangerous Liaisons, Much Ado About Nothing and Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

        He made a surprisingly credible action hero in 1994′s Speed, then wisely passed on the franchise’s waterlogged sequel, Speed 2: Cruise Control. By 1999, he’d found the mind-blowing role that would redefine his career, Neo in The Matrix, but he probably should’ve skipped the muddled sequel and three-quel. He gave his best performance to date as a violent, wife-beating drunk in Sam Raimi’s The Gift. But he hasn’t done himself any favors with his head-scratching choices since, whether it’s weepy romances (Sweet November, The Lake House), warmed-over sci-fi (The Day the Earth Stood Still), rom-coms (Something’s Gotta Give) or generic action flicks (Street Kings).

        He’s all but vanished from the big screen in the past half-decade, appearing only in obscure indies like The Private Lives of Pippa Lee and Henry’s Crime. Now another of these “art” films, Generation Um…, is arriving on VOD in advance of a theatrical release. And it’s certainly not going to turn around his downward career trajectory.

        Reeves stars as a New Yorker who embarks on a night of drinking, drugs and sex with a pair of younger women (Adelaide Clemens, of The Great Gatsby and the Sundance Channel’s hypnotic new drama Rectify, and Bojana Novakovic). He steals a video camera and turns it on them, leading to various amateurishly shot revelations. Plus, there are long scenes of Reeves eating a cupcake, wishing himself a happy birthday, and sleeping. (You may join him in a nap.) Most of the snail-paced movie’s wisdom, courtesy of fittingly unknown writer-director Mark Mann, is along the lines of “S*** doesn’t mean s*** unless it means s*** to you.” As for Generation Um…, this s*** doesn’t mean anything to me.

        What’s next for Reeves? He’s getting in touch with his half-Asian roots (“Keanu” means “cool breeze over the mountains” in Hawaiian, as every magazine profile of Reeves in the ’90s informed us), making his directorial debut with the martial-arts flick Man of Tai Chi, which he shot in China, and the long-delayed 3D samurai epic 47 Ronin, which was filmed in 2011 and is now scheduled for release at Christmas 2013. And he recently gave his blessing to a remake of Kathryn Bigelow’s 1991 cult surfer pic Point Break. Might he be lobbying to reprise his role as wave-catching undercover FBI agent Johnny Utah? At this point, that could be his next big break.

        Like

        • What the happend with his career???

          http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000206/board/flat/207220290?p=1

          I think it could be one of two things. Possibly maybe even a combination of the two.

          1. After all the hype of The Matrix movies, studios might he been less interested in him, because they thought maybe audiences would be burnt out on him.

          2. He took a step back. He was in a very large, popular series of films, and followed that up with Constantine (which wasn’t as big, but wasn’t a small movie). Maybe he simply got burnt out on big movies?

          Keanu is definitely a smart guy but no longer an A-lister. I know the fans will scream at this but it’s true. Maybe he doesn’t care but that doesn’t change the basic fact that he is no longer an A-lister. That’s why A-list projects, such as the Chef movie, fell through and I think Cooper is now being considered for the role.

          A whole new generation of actors has come along and replaced him, and his age peers are producing and directing adult projects, while he is not. Side by Side is an interesting concept but it came off like a big audition.

          Unless he can develop good projects on his own, like Affleck, Clooney and Pitt, his career is over. No one is going to think of him for an A-List project – he’s too big of a star to be a character, and face it fans, he didn’t become a star due to his acting chops (although I think he was quite good in certain parts). He became a star due to his extraordinary looks, and charming presence.

          I truly hope that Ronin turns out to be a success. I have a feeling (worth two cents) that it will be one of those visually interesting but substantively empty films. If it doesn’t make a ton of money it won’t do his career any good.

          Man of Tai Chi? I’m just not interested in that sort of thing.

          I didn’t think Argo or The Descendants or Moneyball were great movies, but at least they were movies for adults about adult subjects. If Keanu wants to be taken seriously he is going to have to develop projects like those. But he doesn’t seem to be interested, so I guess he’ll just have to content himself with his half a billion dollar nest egg. I can think of worse fates.

          Like

        • I think “47 Ronin” serving up to be a massive box office bomb doesn’t really serve Keanu Reeves’ career too well either:
          http://whatculture.com/film/keanu-reeves-5-awesome-performances-5-sucked.php

          Like

      • Speaking of Keanu Reeves, what about his “Matrix” co-star Carrie-Anne Moss:
        http://io9.com/15-movie-actors-whose-careers-were-killed-by-scifi-and-532347846

        The Matrix sequels stopped many careers cold, but none so big as the two biggest leads (Fishburne survived but is stuck in supporting “angry boss” purgatory)

        Keanu: Sure he’s done movies since, but those movies have not been hits. The Lake House, The Day the Earth Stood Still, A Scanner Darkly, Street Kings. None have nearly been as successful and I’m sure Sad Keanu will tell you he hasn’t been sought after for a long while.

        Carrie-Anne: The one-two punch of The Matrix and Memento made her the Next Big Thing. But we were all suffering from Matrix fatigue by the time her 15-minute death scene in Revolutions hit. She was guaranteed to be in Charlize territory but instead ended up playing bit parts on TV. 6/21/13 3:43pm

        http://scripts-onscreen.com/2013/carrie-anne-moss-scripts/

        Carrie-Anne Moss had a skyrocketing career after she first appeared in the Wachowski brothers epic The Matrix trilogy in 1999. Her dynamic persona in the film was breathtaking- a truly tough female character that both women and men could like and feel intimidate by.

        However, her choice of films following the trilogy are not equally memorable- with the sole exception being her role in Disturbia (2007). What could have caused this A-list actor to fall under the radar? It can’t be said that the trilogy ruined her career, as Keanu Reeves is still counted among the A-list and has been receiving continuous roles since the trilogy’s completion.

        While the answer may not be clear, there are some things that her decline could be attested to. For one, Moss had received such attention during the “Matrix years” that she may be trying to lay low; trying new types of films that challenge her as an actress. Two, she may have continued to pursue roles like hers in the Matrix, not realizing that this would mean sudden death to her career. Once you are typecast, there is not much that you can do to save yourself besides find a role that is completely opposite of you.

        Whatever the reason is, lets hope that the dry spell passes soon and that we will see her dynamic personality in future films. As for all the future writers and actors out there, remember to keep diversifying! It could save your career!

        http://thegafblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/carrie-anne-moss-or-oh-oh-here-comes.html

        Why isn’t Carrie-Anne Moss a bigger star?

        That’s her picture up there and it sure isn’t because she’s hard to look at.

        She starred in one of the biggest movie trilogies of all time- The Matrix.

        Sure- she’s also starred in some not so successful movies like The Red Planet but nothing too stinky and definitely not because of anything that she did or did not do.

        In fact I’ve never seen her turn in a poor performance.

        She is working solidly with one or two movie or tv credits a year but where are the starring roles?

        Where are the big movies?

        She’s had hits- both financial and critical, people know her, she is talented and likable.

        So what happened?

        I’ve got my theory but first let’s have a closer look at Carrie-Anne.

        She was born in Vancouver, British Columbia.

        She is 5 foot 8 and a half.

        Was formerly a model

        She is close friends with Maria Bello

        Carrie-Anne has been married since 1999 and has three children.

        Credits include Memento, The Matrix Trilogy, Red Planet, Chocolat and Disturbia.

        And she was born in August 1967.

        Yes- she is now 43 years old.

        Now I may be wrong about this but is she yet another talented actress who has been discarded by Hollywood because she is seen as too old to play leading roles?

        Maybe she has deliberately headed down this path with her career.

        She has three kids and is married- her priorities might be different enough for this to be a deliberate choice- I don’t know.

        What I do know is that I am sick of superb actresses who are only getting better and better as they age being tossed aside when they get to around forty years old.

        Actresses like Rene Russo, Madeleine Stowe, Andie McDowell, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Helen Hunt, Bridget Fonda and Sharon Stone.

        Remember when Sharon Stone was the hottest actress in Hollywood?
        She was nominated for an Oscar in 1995 for Casino.

        Rene Russo was in a lot of big movies including Get Shorty, Lethal Weapon 3 and 4, The Thomas Crowne Affair and Outbreak and starred with every major superstar actor in the business.

        Like Carrie-Anne Moss, Russo was a model before she was an actress.
        Maybe this is the problem.

        It seems that to get anywhere as an actress you have to be good looking first, talented second (if at all- refer to Kate Hudson and Kristen Stewart)

        It would be great if most people thought of this when they heard the name Carrie-Anne Moss…

        Like

        • re: superb actresses who are only getting better and better as they age being tossed aside when they get to around forty years old.

          Hooray for Hollywood! [that was sarcasm]

          Like

        • I get the cynicism. But I feel the need to offer the counter point that at the end of the day, audiences are to blame. Audiences vote with their dollar. And the result is Megan Fox and Transformers.

          Like

  32. I love that you call here the queen of bad remakes. You should do naomi watts, the real queen of remakes (good and bad). She seemed to be breaking onto the a-list and that just hasn’t seemed to happen (don’t know why). Maybe she hasn’t really flopped like some but she doesn’t really seem to be going anywhere these days.

    Like

    • Watts is on my list. There’s some good material there. She’s never quite made it to the A-list, but for a while she sure seemed like she was headed there.

      Like

  33. Obviosuly, I haven’t seen the movie yet. I liked Chicago, so I was really looking forward to Nine. But the reviews were dreadful so I skipped it. Thanks for the catch. I have corrected the picture.

    Like

    • Yeah, I don’t think I’ll ever bother watching it.

      I did watch The Paperboy the other night. What a bizarre mess that was! It defies description.

      Like

  34. I was never a huge fan of Kidman, although she was splendid in The Others. I felt Julianne Moore acted her right off the screen in The Hours, although I also rather liked her in Birthday Girl. Kidman’s frozen, mannequin-like face and domed forehead of the latter years are almost certainly what is killing her career. When I watched Australia all I could see was that smooth, expressionless face, it was really jarring and continually distracting. There is a scene where she is supposed to down a shot of alcohol and grimace. Hardly a muscle on her face moved, I actually felt embarrassed for her. I remember wishing desperately he had picked someone like Cate Blanchett to play the role, it could have been an amazing movie.

    I’ve only just discovered your series, and am having a fine time reading through your posts. I have learned a great deal about actors such as Thora Birch and Kathleen Turner, things I never knew before today. Your articles are fun to read, well researched and it’s clear you have some compassion for the people you are discussing. Great stuff, and thanks!

    Like

    • Oh wow, Alison. You just made my day! Thanks so much for reading and I’m glad you are enjoying the series. Even though I give the celebs a hard time, it’s always in the spirit of good fun.

      If you are casting someone who has to remain untouchable and icy, Kidman is perfect for the role. I think she’s a talented actress, but she is less suited to roles that require more vulnerability. The plastic surgery has to play into that.

      I just watched The Paper Boy recently and she looked really cheap and trashy. It fit the role, but I also couldn’t help thinking it was a result of what she has done to her face in recent years.

      Like

      • She had such a natural beauty in Dead Calm. I guess actresses get terrible advice from everyone in Hollywood to lose the wrinkles- but until plastic surgery improves- I would stay away.

        Like

        • She definitely crossed a line somewhere. I’m not sure when it happened exactly. But there is no denying a line has been crossed.

          Like

  35. Just admit you were stalking Judi Dench already! 😉

    Like

  36. So to follow up on our discussion of A list. (There might be comments on another thread somewhere too). Ok, this just blows me away: “Identity Thief.” Box office hit from what I understand, and I have friends who made a beeline to the theatre on opening day. I didn’t. Finally saw it 2 nights ago from Redbox. OK but not that great.. and…. ready for this? Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy are the leads. I like both of them in every role they’ve been in. But they are not A list stars, and they are opening a big box office. In one sense this seems to be promising, that creativity can survive but then I find the creativity lacking. The movie itself disappoints as it joins a long line of movies with great premises, talented actors and some funny jokes but overall lazy writing and sloppy to the point where it’s getting to be a comedy/disaster formula: This is 40, Knocked Up, Hangover I and II, Horrible Bosses…. you get the idea. Also, the others have an A-lister or two to headline in there somewhere, Identity Thief did not. Thoughts?

    Like

    • With the BO success of The Heat, I think McCarthy is arguably A-list. If she’s not, she’s hovering on the borders. As we have said, it’s getting harder and harder to rank the A-list as stars keep shrinking. I’m not even sure there are A-list lead actresses anymore. But McCarthy is one of the more bankable stars these days.

      Bateman has had a few hits. But he is unreliable (though reliably good) at the box office. He just makes too many crappy movies. Some hit, some don’t. Identity Thief definitely raised his profile. If he gets more selective, he might be able to hit the A-list.

      Comedy is a tricky thing. Few comedic actors reign at the A-list for long. Audiences are fickle, Tastes change. Schtick gets old. So as hard as talking about the A-list can be, I think it’s even harder to nail down for niche genres like comedy, horror, sci fi, etc.

      Like

  37. McCarthy had her breakthrough before The Heat, in Bridesmaids, although I suspect the title makes that work infinitely more memorable to us women. (I loved it). She’s an excellent character actress but I didn’t think “the suits” would open a movie with her, ditto Jason Bateman who has also been at least B list forever by virtue of TV and movie work and by being the brother of Justine Bateman. I think Jason is a good solid comic straight-man actor (almost interchangeable with Paul Rudd) and agree totally with your assessment above, many movies, largely forgettable, but a few hits. It’s interesting that he is now a movie opener. Perhaps he also got a career boost from The Switch with Jennifer Aniston.

    Like

    • Bridesmaids definitely put McCarthy on the map. But Kristen Wiig was the star. McCarthy was a supporting player who happened to steal the show. The question was, could she carry a film. Identity Thief showed she could. But she was co-starring with Bateman. The Heat shows definitely that McCarthy is a draw. Even though she is co-starring again, she had two solid hits in one year. The combination of the two establishes her as a legit force at the box office.

      Bateman is a draw too. He’s definitely in demand. If you are making a modestly-budgeted comedy, you are definitely looking at Bateman because in the right film, he will deliver. The problem is, he doesn’t have a built-in audience like McCarthy does. If the movie stinks, Bateman can’t save it at the box office. (Although he can usually make it at least watchable.)

      Rudd is interesting. Will he ever make it on to the A-list?

      Back to Bateman, I’m a big Arrested Development fan. I just find Bateman’s cadences to be funny. He doesn’t even need good material. He’s just a funny guy. But if you give him good material, he knocks it out of the park. A while back, he did some body-switching comedy with Ryan Reynolds which was just awful. But the promotional footage of the two of them cutting up was hysterical.

      Back to McCarthy, I find her success very refreshing. I hope she continues killing it at the box office. We have needed a star like her for a long time.

      Like

  38. 8 OF THE MOST OVERRATED AND OVERPAID MOVIE STARS:
    http://guyism.com/entertainment/movies/most-overrated-and-overpaid-movie-stars.html

    I’m just going to list some figures here and let them speak for themselves, because, honestly, they don’t just speak, they scream that Nicole Kidman is hilariously overpaid and overrated – for Australia, she was paid thirteen million dollars. The movie made fourteen million dollars in the U.S. For The Invasion she was paid more than sixteen million dollars, for The Golden Compass fifteen million dollars, for The Interpreter fifteen million dollars, another fifteen million for Birth and then fifteen million more for The Stepford Wives. And to top it all off, for Bewitched she was paid more than seventeen million dollars. Either she’s got the most powerful agent in the world or she actually is a witch.

    Like

  39. Nicole Kidman is my favorite actress. I think she is the most talented lady in the game. True, she has made some total bullshit (What the hell was TRESPASS?!), but no one excites me more. Now we just have to get her to stop cutting her face. She is starting to look like a goblin. STOKER was really uncomfortable. She went from gorgeous to terrifying sometimes in the same shot.

    Her greatest performance would have to be MARGOT AT THE WEDDING. Here is my review: http://cineaste83.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/the-rental-margot-at-the-wedding-noah-baumbach-2007/

    Like

    • I still need to see that one! I’ve heard good things. My personal favorite Kidman movie was To Die For.

      Like

      • I haven’t seen that one! Gus van Sant is VERY hit or miss for me. But yes MARGOT AT THE WEDDING is brilliant. And I really love DOGVILLE and BIRTH.

        Like

        • I don’t want to oversell To Die For, but I really enjoyed it. Dogville was long and slow. But the payoff was worth the wait. I was pretty fascinated by Birth, but it was a little like watching a train wreck. I can’t say I enjoyed it, but I couldn’t look away either.

          Like

        • Yes DOGVILLE takes some patience. As do all of Lars von Trier’s movies…

          I really liked BIRTH because it seems so singular. The music is great and the story is so original. And Nicole goes for it! Not too many actresses would even entertain the notion of getting in a bath tub with a kid. That’s why I really like her. She takes chances.

          Like

        • She definitely takes chances. At the height of her career, she was making movies I don’t think another other actress would make. I respect the hell out of her for that. It’s a shame her mainstream film choices were so questionable. But even then, she signed on to projects that had potential and went horribly awry like The Stepford Wives.

          Like

        • Ugh. THE STEPFORD WIVES is Bad Cinema for certain. I need to write about that one…

          Like

        • The background story is better than the movie. Plus, you get to hear Frank Oz swear a lot.

          Like

        • Say, Lebeau, what’s up with Nicole’s right hand in that pic of her in “To Die For”? Looks tres strange, indeed. Is she part alien? (grin)

          Best Regards,
          b

          Like

    • I heard that Nicole Kidman is going to portray Grace Kelly in an upcoming film called “Grace of Monaco”. Much of the comments that I’ve read thus far, believe that she is awfully miscast:
      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2095649/board

      Like

      • Kidman in her 30s would have been good casting. But she’s much older than Kelly was in her Hollywood days. I am holding out hope she can pull it off.

        Like

        • I also heard a lot that Rosamund Pike (who was in the James Bond movie “Die Another Day”) would’ve been a much better choice to play Grace Kelly in that film instead of Nicole Kidman.

          Like

        • Pike has the look. But I haven’t seen enough of her work to know how good of an actress she is.

          I’m okay with Kidman as Kelly. I’ll at least withhold judgement until I see her in the role. Affleck as Batman on the other hand…

          Like

        • Kelly was a baby – 25 in To Catch a Thief! (She is perfect in that- and I’m sad to say- her youth certainly helped her angel -like features) Basically walked away at 26— hmm- a retro WTHH? (I think the world knows what happened)

          Like

        • When I was in high school, I went through a major “classic Hollywood phase.” Had Le Blog (or the internet) existed back then, I would have written a series on classic Hollywood movie stars. I was especially interested in Hitchcock’s stars of which Kelly was one. So no doubt she would have been one of the first entries in this hypothetical series.

          If I had unlimited time, I would love to go back and rewatch all of the old classics and write up such a series. For now, sadly, it is not to be. Altough if anyone else wants to write it, I’ll be happy to read it! Maybe some day when the kids are grown.

          I figure in the distant future if I am ever able to retire, Le Blog is going to be a happening place.

          Like

      • Yeah, I’m not sure how I feel about this one. It just seems like a shameless plug for an Oscar. Or the script is great. But lately Nicole has been making some dubious choices so who knows.

        Like

      • TMC I heard about that same project, a while ago. I wonder if the project is still on tap. The criticism about casting Nicole Kidman had to do with her age but the biopic was supposed to be about Kelly in her later years, post 30 (oh gee, how very old, how very cruel is Hollywood…) which to me, would be perfect casting. She can’t play the young Grace Kelly.

        Like

        • I think that the criticism has more to do w/ Nicole’s “artificial” facial features (*cough* botox *cough*) than it has to do w/ her age!

          Like

        • I have not heard that euphemism before. I like it.

          Like

        • Lebeau this blog couldn’t be any more happening than it already is… apologies for not posting this directly after the comment you made but my computer just blows up lately if you try to link to an earlier comment.
          Might seriously be time to get a new computer.
          anyway, point is, there is so much traffic on here, and it’s all good traffic…

          Like

        • Honestly, the traffic here far exceeds any expectations I had when I started the site. Every year when I see the summary of activity, I’m amazed by how much it has grown. This year has been the biggest yet. It seems to snowball as I add more and more content. So I figure that will only continue over time.

          It took the site several years to reach one million hits. In the four months since we hit that threshhold, the site has done over half a million hits. We get more traffic now than we did in the first several years combined. A few years from now, I imagine the traffic will be doubled or tripled. I don’t even speculate anymore.

          What I was basically getting at with my comment is that one day in the distant future, I’ll have a lot of time on my hands to devote to the blog. When that happens, there will be a lot more content and a greater variety as well. But at present, I’m still awed by the success of what is basically a hobby I started to pass the time when I was bored at work. Shhhh.

          Like

        • 9 Female Celebrities Who Can’t Accept Getting Older:
          http://www.fame10.com/entertainment/9-female-celebrities-who-cant-accept-getting-older/9/

          1. Nicole Kidman

          Nicole Kidman would probably never admit this, but we don’t think she wants to age. She has been tweaking her face for years and, up until last year, she wanted everyone to believe that her wrinkle-free face was because she uses sunscreen religiously and doesn’t smoke. She still has difficulty moving her face and expressing emotions, so she obviously hasn’t given up on the Botox. We don’t think she will ever accept that she is aging and she will do anything to thwart the process.

          Like

      • Sorry, Nicole Kidman. People hate your new movie. Read about that hate here:
        http://cblend.co/1gE17f0

        Like

        • I think Grace Kelly is treasured too much (especially by the Royal Family) for many people being pleased with the actress of choice anyway. I think Cate Blanchett would have a shot, maybe, but I doubt there are many more that would be deemed acceptable.

          Like

      • Nicole Kidman’s Grace of Monaco to premiere on Lifetime instead of theaters:
        http://www.eonline.com/news/643953/nicole-kidman-is-coming-to-lifetime-huh

        The film about Grace Kelly was supposed to be released in November 2013, but it got such terrible reviews that a theatrical released. Instead, it’ll air on Lifetime on Memorial Day.

        Like

    • Academy Awards Winners With The Biggest Amount of Crap Roles:
      http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/487695/academy-awards-winners-biggest-amount?page=2

      yesterday at 2:52pm

      Gotta go with Halle Berry. Her Oscar win was undeserved (Nicole Kidman should have won for Moulin Rouge) and to be honest, she’s a pretty bad actress. Only reason she keeps getting work is because she’s “hot”, but luckily most films she stars in are horrible. She also portrayed the worst Bond girl in recent history.
      Denise Richards as a scientist is not objectively worse as a Bond girl? Further her role was a stronger one than Kidman having a broad archetypal thing over having to portray a character, I dislike that movie though, so I am not unbiased, except maybe feeling that was a year of weak contenders for a lot of things… but that is neither here nor there for this topic.

      Denise Richards, while a weak actress, managed to sell the ridiculous character of Christmas Jones. Sure it was stupid and ill-conceived but at least I enjoyed that character within the context of the film. It also didn’t hurt that she had lots of chemistry with Pierce Brosnan.

      Halle Berry as Jinx was a low point of Die Another Day. Her character was better written than Christmas Jones was but Halle didn’t manage to make it either believable or interesting. She was just there for the bikini shot. She also had zero chem with Brosnan which killed the flow of the film because Rosamund Pike playing the ‘bad’ Bond girl had lots of fiery chemistry with Pierce and it made one question why Bond would ever want Jinx.

      Moulin Rouge is one of my favorite films of all time and to think Nicole Kidman didn’t win for that haunting performance as Satine is ridiculous. Halle Berry took her top off to mack on Billy Bob Thornton and that’s what deserves Best Actress accolades? It was a cliched, flawed film with Berry giving a flat, uninspired performance that pretty much no one remembers anymore. Kidman brought layers to Satine who in lesser hands could have been just another hooker with the heart of gold.

      10 hours ago

      Don’t get me wrong, Jinx was forgettable. But Halle Barry ends up not requiring a fifth of Tequila for the audience to suspend disbelief. Denise Richards did, point of fact. As she is incapable of conveying conviction in any role she is in.

      As for the actual Oscar that year, yeah Halle Barry shouldn’t have won, and history has proven that her Oscar was a fluke in her career. Sissy Spacek should have walked with that award.

      And then you had to say there were ‘layers’ to anything involving Moulin Rouge. A movie that was profound in it’s shallowness, to a Worhollian degree. Don’t misconstrue, I said I didn’t like it, but I don’t like it on it’s own merits, it was a dislike earned by viewing it, and it’s faux-fanciful wannabe magical realist bullshit, like some sort of diet fat free Terry Gilliam substitute. It is inconsistent tone, filled with easy platitudes.

      There was no depth to the role, Kidman, a fine actress, was simply not up to the task of breathing life into something that was the very definition of artifice, and yes she has the strongest performance in the movie, but… There is no weight or gravity allowed. Let alone breathing room. The movie whirls between moments. So beyond being just a bog standard ‘tragic love story,’ with bog standard ‘artist and realist’ tarted up with interesting visual flairs, and a banal selection of music.

      Kidman’s efforts are buried.

      Like

      • 8 Inherently Annoying Movies That Everyone You Know Seems To Love:
        http://whatculture.com/film/8-inherently-annoying-movies-that-everyone-you-know-seems-to-love.php/2

        Moulin Rogue!

        From the very first time you read its title, complete with exclamation mark, Moulin Rogue!, strikes you as flamboyantly obnoxious. For the record, most Baz Luhrmann movies are inherently annoying in their own way – hyper-stylization rarely isn’t – but Moulin Rogue! takes the cake as the director’s most cringe-inducing cinematic travesty.

        Okay, so “travesty” might not be the right word, but it’s not far off: for over two hours, Moulin Rogue! forces audiences to listen to Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor as they reprise a hefty selection of the some of the most famous love songs in history, whilst Lurhmann creates a messy, muddled palette of awful special effects and clashing stylistic sequences around them. Which is nowhere near as much fun as it thinks it is.

        Moulin Rogue! seems readily designed to as a movies that “everyone will love” (another reason it’s so irksome), but what people are really enjoying when they watch this film is the famous songs – all of which are better in their original versions. And those quick cuts and flash edits aren’t clever; they’re irritating. Moulin Rogue! is so smug and in love with itself that it makes you want to punch the person who put it all together in the face.

        That’s you, Baz.

        Like

  40. Actors Hollywood Tried to Make Happen: Indiewire’s List:
    http://awardswatch.com/forums/showthread.php?33497-Actors-Hollywood-Tried-to-Make-Happen-Indiewire-s-List&p=1666012&viewfull=1#post1666012

    Nikki is clearly a difficult case. During the mid-aughties she clearly was viewed upon as bonafide A-List and many believed that would make her an instant box office draw, and she succeeded 50/50. Bewitched and Stepford Wives didn’t make distrauous grosses. Kidman is no Julia Roberts and the films got bad reviews, but they grossed midsized (50-60), but the budgets were too high. They overrated her star power domestically, yes, but she wasn’t an all-right flop as a star, especially not internationally. The Golden Compass was a hit overseas and so could also be said about Australia.

    Kidman’s biggest debits are The Invasions (a flop all-around) and that her art house ventures lacks mainstream appeal.

    Like

  41. Marty Rathbun didn’t write “Going Clear” it was written by Lawrence Wright.

    Like

  42. Nicole Kidman is one of my favorite actresses (top 3); heck, I even recorded “BMX Bandits” sometime back. The films I’ve seen that I enjoyed the most: “Dead Calm”, “Billy Bathgate” (I’m a sucker for gangster flicks), “To Die For” (my personal favorite of her oeuvre), “Birthday Girl” (I think it’s underrated), “The Others”, “Cold Mountain”, “Dogville”, “The Human Stain” (sounds like a punk rock song), and “Rabbit Hole”.

    Like

    • I have been a big fan of To Die For since it was released. I was always surprised it wasn’t more popular than it turned out to be. I really expected it would be discovered over time. It has a cult following, but not as big as I expected it would have.

      Like

      • I thought “To Die For” did everything right. What a fantastic cast in general (Dan Heyada, who made “Dick” and “Blood Simple” awesome), Joanquin Phoenix, Wayne Knight..wow. I’m glad I paid to see this film, then recorded it later.

        Like

        • Dan Hedaya is just awesome in everything. One of my favorite scenes in any movie is Dan Hedaya’s “I know he can get the job but can he do the job” monologue from the criminally under-rated movie, Joe Vs. the Volcano.

          As for To Die For, it still makes me laugh. If anything, it has grown more relevant over time.

          Like

  43. Yeah, I think “To Die For” is whipsmart satire at its finest.
    On another note, I haven’t seen “Joe Vs. The Volcano” in years, but I do recall that scene; I’m glad you posted it, Lebleu.

    Like

  44. Ruined by Woody Allen: What does Scarlett Johansson want?

    https://trove.com/?hash_nav=1#me/content/YHaLu?chid=152505&_p=trending&utm_source=wp&utm_medium=Widgets&utm_campaign=wpsrTrendingExternal-1-opt

    The model for Johansson’s career going forward is an unlikely one, perhaps: Nicole Kidman. The elder actress spent her early career projecting absolutely nothing onscreen, making her terrific playing a sociopath in “To Die For” and forgettable elsewhere. But Kidman, post-divorce and post-“Moulin Rouge” breakthrough, put herself in the hands of some of the world’s most idiosyncratic and talented directors (including “Under the Skin” director Jonathan Glazer, in whose “Birth” Kidman shone).

    Kidman is not a box-office draw — she has no “Avengers” — but she makes a couple of truly interesting films a year. She is taken seriously by critics and the press not simply as a beauty but as an actress with real agency in choosing roles and choosing what she does with them. She got there in a different way, but she has what Johansson wants. It’s tough, perhaps, to be a beautiful woman who wants to be taken seriously as an actress.

    Like

  45. Adriana Gashi

    Nicole was and still is my favorite actress but I have to admit she has changed very much since she had met this guy (her husband). She used to have such an innocent smile, and beautiful face and now she is using botox on her lips, her face. Nicole has destroyed her face and she is not even realizing that, unfortunately. NO wonder why her career as an actress is going down. She can not even smile; her smile is ugly; unnatural -I must say!
    Please Nicole, go back to your natural face! It is better to have some wrinkles rather than plastic face! I am saying this not to make you feel bad, Nicole, but to help you wake up!

    Like

    • Eillio Martin Imbasciati

      I just think plastic surgery and botox comes with the territory in regards to actors, like steroids for athletes. Some need it, some don’t, but even those that don’t feel that they must.

      Like

      • I agree with you and the previous poster.

        Kidman frequently looks ghastly today. It is a shame what surgery has done to her face. Unfortunately, it is also expected these days. Age is unkind to actresses. Without the surgery, Kidman might be working even less than she does.

        Like

        • 9 Celebs Who Looked Better Before Plastic Surgery:
          http://www.fame10.com/entertainment/9-celebs-who-looked-better-before-plastic-surgery/9/

          1. Nicole Kidman

          Nicole Kidman has been doing stuff to her face for years, although she has continually denied it. “I am completely natural. I wear sunscreen, I don’t smoke and I take care of myself, and I am proud to say that,” she told Marie Claire in 2008. It took another three years for her to finally admit that she was using Botox. She still won’t admit to anything else. “No surgery for me; I did try Botox, unfortunately, but I got out of it and now I can finally move my face again,” she told La Repubblica, an Intalian newspaper, in 2011.

          The Oscar-winning actress must think people are pretty dumb if she thinks that we believe that she doesn’t use Botox or any other type of plastic surgery procedure to keep her wrinkle-free face. She’s nearing 50 and she’s never had a wrinkle. She was so pretty when she was younger she’d probably still be really pretty now if she hadn’t decided to try and freeze her face.

          Like

  46. kidmans problem was she kept chasing every part that seem to be oscar bait and it backfired it showed she was too desperete for oscar

    Like

    • I’ll give her a little more credit. I think she genuinely sought out projects that interested her. She has her Oscar now, but she’s still doing odd independent movies made by up and coming directors. I’m sure nabbing an Oscar was a goal. But I don’t think it was her only motivation for choosing unconventional roles.

      I’d say Kidman’s biggest problem career-wise was that when she made a mainstream Hollywood movie, they almost always flopped. She had a string of very high profile disasters on her resume that basically ended her career as an A-lister.*

      *With the caveat that the term “A-list actress” doesn’t mean what it used to mean. Since very few young actresses can be qualified as A-list, Kidman arguably still is even though she no longer gets lead roles in mainstream movies. It’s a weird situation.

      Like

  47. at this point maybe she do a romantic comedy with a big name actor like johnny depp kidman never did before it would be interesting to see and audience might see her in a whole new light and like it

    Like

    • Rom coms are for girls in their 20s. Big names in their thirties can pull them off. Really big named actresses in their forties maybe. Kidman’s past her rom com expiration date. I think she’s in the right place doing indie movies.

      Like

  48. Nicole’s been in more bombs than I care to count. Not saying it was her fault, but I always found it interesting (or maybe annoying) that almost everyone would use these failures as proof that she was still an A-list actor. Outside of a few well reviewed indies, she’s picked some very bad movies to appear in.

    Like

    • There have been times where I think he loyalty to a project was her downfall. She knew she should have bailed on the Stepford Wives. That thing was a nightmare and everyone knew nothing good was going to come from it. But she felt obligated to go down with the ship. I believe the same was true of Invasion. She probably could have cut her losses and saved herself an embarrassing flop.

      In fairness, I want to point out that a lot of these projects looked good on paper. Stepford Wives and Bewtitched were interesting properties with talented casts and directors. I don’t blame Kidman for choosing what seemed like a promising project. They just didn’t pan out for whatever reason.

      Like

      • 10 Movie Flops You’ve Probably Forgotten

        http://whatculture.com/film-tv/10-movie-flops-youve-probably-forgotten?page=4

        Bewitched

        Directed by Nora Ephron, Bewitched is a remake of the 1960s TV show given a post-modern spin: while searching for someone to take the Elizabeth Montgomery role in a remake of Bewitched, the movie’s producers discover Isabel Bigalow (Nicole Kidman), who unbeknownst to them really is a witch.

        Will Ferrell plays her comic foil, but even he can’t do much to save a movie that doesn’t appear to have any actual jokes. The film falls over itself to appear as sweet and good-natured as the source material, but there’s no screen magic being made here, just a few predictable gags as Kidman uses her powers to tame Ferrell’s self-centred thespian.

        Michael Caine appears as Kidman’s father and Shirley MacLaine plays a mugging actress, but with nothing to work with, nobody gets a chance to steal the show. Even for a movie from the writer of Sleepless In Seattle, this is lightweight and forgettable.

        Like

  49. roberts was dead then she was in that movie with streep automatic oscar nomination i think a strong supporting role next veteran like streep is what the doctor ordered before she gets comfy as lead actress again

    Like

  50. and lebeau if u think Nicole is past her romcom expatriation date watch its complicated streep is charming in this romantic comedy and shes older then Nicole . I think Nicole should try some lighter roles she takes herself serious who knows she could have a 2nd career as rom come actress

    Like

    • You can’t compare anyone to Meryl Streep. Streep is an anomaly. Her late career renaissance is unprecedented for modern actresses. It was actually fairly common in the Golden Age though.

      Like

  51. to die for and her apperance on snl shows she can do comedy it would do what road to peridtion and truman show did for hanks and carey audience see kidman in a new light. Kidman should tone it down in indie picks that are desperate for oscars and have some fun in her movie roles. For example box office hit we are the millers kidman would been awesome in aniston role and done a better job too

    Like

    • Agree Kidman can handle a role like that (witness her and Aniston playing off each other in “Just go With It”) but disagree that she would have bested Aniston in “The Millers”. JA hits those roles out of the park consistently. She’s had lots of practice and if anything, for that trademark comic touch, I give her a bit of an edge over NK.

      Like

  52. i felt aniston was channeling rachel in that movie and all she can do no range kidman would bring charm to that role.

    Like

  53. aniston does own them but it gets tiring see her play them. kidman would bring something new to it

    Like

    • I like Kidman, but she and Aniston are completely different types. Aniston has relatable comic chops that Kidman does not and she IS American, rather than having to PLAY American. There is a difference, and why make your job more difficult than it needs to be, if the character is supposed to be a certain type?

      Like

      • michael hansberry

        nicole kidman is american. she was born in hawaii.

        Like

        • She has dual residence. She was born in Hawaii to Australian parents and was raised in Australia.

          Like

        • The point remains that Kidman does not read as the type of middle-class all-American girl that Aniston does. Because of her upbringing she reads as upper-class (and Australian when she speaks in her natural dialect). How an actor reads is actually more important in casting than what it says on their birth certificate. I was born in the deep south and have lived most of my life there, but that is not how I read to audiences, so I’m actually not cast that way very often, but quite often as someone from the midwest or far west of America.

          Like

  54. i think given the chance she could be just as good aniston in leading romcom but no one give her the chance or maybe she turns them down

    Like

    • It’s not about how good she is as an actress. She is a good actress. It is about casting type. There just aren’t very many comedic roles written for statuesque upper-class Australian women. It is not a type which inspires comedy. Female comic leads are traditionally a more relatable type. Aniston fits that type. Think Meg Ryan. Even upper-class female comedic types tend toward “cute” rather than elegant. Look at Claudette Colbert in “It Happened One Night,” or Audrey Hepburn in her comedies. Maybe Kidman could do something like a Noel Coward piece like “Private Lives,” but those kinds of scripts just aren’t being made very often.

      Like

  55. bewetiched which although sucked as a movie i thought she was amzaing in it she was as good in that movie as meg ryan would be in her other romantic comides and i understand wat u say it may seem llike she do sent fit the romantic comedy role mold. but if not romantic comedy maybe a chick flick comedy like bridesmaids or dramadys. since she does fit that upperlcass type role maybe if remake pride and prejudice again she can fit it

    Like

  56. I’m a huge Nicole Kidman fan and I’m really happy you featured an article on her as I have noticed she’s not leading anymore. The only issue I have is that you never seem to take into account the range of these actresses. Yes, Rabbit Hole or Dogville or Birth weren’t massively successful films, but I don’t think she went into those films expecting them to be. Those movies showcase her impressive range as an actress and that, to me, means more than a box office smash.

    Like

    • I totally agree, Michael. And I apologize if that doesn’t come across in the article. I think I have talked about it here in the comments section. I’ve been spending the last few weeks updating some of the older articles and this one is due for a fresh coat of paint. I will make sure to high light that when I update the article.

      I have always given Kidman a lot of credit for taking on challenging roles. She seems attracted to the least commercial movies possible. I think that worked for her when her commercial movies were hits or an offbeat movie like The Others went mainstream. But when she had a string of high profile flops, it didn’t help that she was making all these oddball experimental films. I applaud her for doing so, but it had to hurt her career as a Hollywood movie star.

      On the other side of that, she is beloved in the indie film community and continues to work there even after her Hollywood star has faded. So in terms of her acting career, it gives her longevity beyond the A-list. I’m still very impressed with Kidman’s courage as an actress.

      Like

  57. Yes, her flops like Bewitched and Stepford didn’t help at all. They’re quite embarrassing. I really hope she can make a career comeback. I just love her. (P.S. I am about to email you about how much I love this blog.)

    Like

    • I look forward to hearing from you and I’m glad you like the site.

      I like Kidman a lot, but I’m not looking for her to come back to leading roles in mainstream Hollywood movies. I am sure she’s going to keep working in indie movies. That seems to be where her interests are anyway.

      Like

  58. she would out of place in a mainstream like daniel day lewis in acton

    Like

  59. pierce would be good addition to it

    Like

  60. Would diane lane make a good addition to this site? She seemed to finally hit the a-list after being oscar nominated for unfaithful, but now it seems like we hardly ever see her anymore except in mom roles like in man of steel.

    Like

    • I think Diane Lane’s career is an exhibit A for “What The Hell Happened To,,,”. Considering that she was on the cover of Time magazine thirty some years ago (1979 I believe) and much acclaim and success was predicted for her, but in reality her career has been busy but not astounding, she fits the criteria. Now I’m seen most of her films, the early films and the later films (Hey, I always liked 1987’s “The Big Town”; good cast too, but it never took off. I think 1992’s “My New Gun” is a neat little independent film, and I liked 2009’s “Killshot”), and I guess she either A.) Has bad luck with films (1984’s “The Cotton Club” was supposed to be a hit, but that murder that was on the periphery garnered more interest than the film itself) B.) Has bad taste in projects.
      Again, I actually LIKE most of the films she’s performed in (probably because I’ve been rooting for her since I was 7 years old:-), but reality is reality. Actually, I look at the career of Nicole Kidman (my second favorite actress) I see the career Diane Lane could’ve had, if the breaks went differently or better projects were chosen.

      Like

      • I can say with certainty that I will cover Diane Lane at some point in the series.

        You guys may have noticed that there hasn’t been a new WTHH in a while. I have been spending my time updating old articles. As the series progressed, I raised my standards higher and higher. So a lot of the early articles are relatively thin compared to the newer ones. This week, I’ve been tweaking the Robin Williams article for obvious reasons. I also worked on the Arnold Schwarzenegger article over the weekend to tie in with Expendables 3. There’s really a lot of old articles that require some TLC. But soon, I’ll move on to new subjects. Lane’s on my list.

        Like

  61. dont forget her costar gere his box office is falling and man of steel put her back i would say it will lead to more roles.While we are at lets add james caan too gene hackman chris o donneel and michael cera

    Like

  62. steve martin too who last good movie was bowfinger and maybe shopgirl

    Like

  63. I don’t think man of steel did much for her career, considering it wasn’t her movie. Maybe it’ll remind directors about her again, but so far it doesn’t seem to be. I’m kinda surprised chris o’donnell isn’t on here already.

    Like

  64. Since you’re a fan of tom hanks, what did you think of saving mr. banks? Did you see that?

    Like

  65. lead or supporting a hit movie will remind producers about an actor. Example is harrison ford was not the lead in star wars but his performance was amazing it lead indian jones and lead roles dinae lane and costner for that matter were incredible that will lead to more important roles. whethear lead or supporting you got admit a hit movie is still good to have in your resume despite the screen time. dont u agree with me gere should be on the list

    Like

    • Since you mentioned Harrison Ford’s role in Star Wars leading to Indiana Jones, it brings to mind something interesting. While they were still casting for Raiders, George Lucas showed his good friend Steven Spielberg a rough cut of The Empire Strikes Back several months before its release, and Spielberg said Harrison was a revelation in Empire. When the screening ended, Spielberg turned to Lucas and said “He is Indy.” Long story short, Harrison Ford got cast as Indy and Raiders became a phenomenon. Interestingly, a year later Ridley Scott was still looking to cast the main role of Rick Deckard for Blade Runner. Steven Spielberg showed Ridley a rough cut of Raiders of the Lost Ark several months before its release, and Ridley claims it was while watching that rough cut of Raiders that he realized Harrison Ford would be perfect for Rick Deckard. Isn’t that an amazing coincidence?

      The point of this story? I dunno, I guess if you’re Harrison Ford then you really want rough cuts of your films shown to other filmmakers when they’re considering casting.

      Like

  66. saving mr banks was amazing i saw disney interview he got the voice down amazing i heard he did research it shows i love his performance in big he had so much fun in the role i had fun watching him. big underatted

    Like

  67. she choose blockbuster crap like jumper and chick flick shit like must love dogs. she should back to strong indies like unfaithful she is a good actor she can do it but man of steel helped her career it could lead to more roles not every hit movie on actors resume has to be lead

    Like

  68. but lets talk about richard gere he has alot of flops since his breakthrough role in officer and gentlemen he didnt have a hit till eight years later with pretty women then he didnt have hit til nine years later in runaway bride. then three years later hit in chicago it was 12 years ago his films flop since,his career was never consistent he had alot of flops his career still in dumps u think he should be there

    Like

  69. selleck was supposed to do Indy but turned it down to magnum pi and yes if the rough cuts are good why not show them . but what do u think of gere his career sucked

    Like

    • I think there have been some highlights and lowlights to Richard Gere’s career. He started off hot (“American Gigolo”, “An Officer and a Gentleman”), then cooled a bit (the remake of “Breathless”, “King David”), then came back strong (“Pretty Woman”, the underrated “Internal Affairs”), stayed steady (“Primal Fear”, “Runaway Bride”), but ever since “Unfaithful”, his projects haven’t created much buzz. I don’t know, over the years Richard Gere kind of grew on me

      Like

      • I remember An Officer And A Gentleman being a big hit in 1983 or so, but I never saw it. I dunno, is it any good? Keep in mind I remember the hit song from the movie, “Up Where We Belong”, and I’m afraid to admit despite the major cheese involved I’ve always liked the song, so that may help in any suggestions either way. Oh, also, I’ve always adored Debra Winger from Urban Cowboy, I had a crush on her as a boy because of that movie…… maybe I’m answering my own question here at this point.

        Like

        • I think “An Officer and a Gentleman” would be worth your time. Yeah, I like that song as well; it makes me think of this time when I was about 6 years old, and my mother took me to the beach during the winter so I could view the snow mounds. That song was on the radio on the way there.

          Like

        • If you like Up Where We Belong and have a crush on Young Debra Winger, there is a high probability you will enjoy Officer and a Gentleman. How do you feel about Lou Gossett Jr?

          Like

      • He’s had a lot of highs and lows. Which always makes for interesting articles. One day, I want to have articles on the three main leads of Chicago. So many subjects. So little time.

        Like

      • Derailed Film Stars: A Grooveless Richard Gere:
        https://web.archive.org/web/20150127080324/http://www.twcc.com/articles/2015/01/18/d/derailed-film-stars-a-grooveless-richard-gere

        Original | Brendon McCullin, Original

        Published January 18, 2015 07:00PM EST

        Richard Gere has been on the scene a long time. It’s hard to remember now, but Gere was Diane Keaton’s creepy stalker in 1977’s Looking For Mr. Goodbar. The ’80s, though, were Gere’s peak. He carried Debra Winger off to a better life at the beginning of the decade in An Officer and a Gentleman, and as it closed he was doing the same for Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman. Heck, the actor was even a favorite of the Dalai Lama. Things haven’t quite been the same since, though. His strong work in Arbitrage in 2012, was sandwiched between such forgettable fare as The Double and Movie 43. Where did his career go sideways? We take a look.

        Like

        • I recently viewed Richard Gere in “Looking For Mr. Goodbar”, and holy crow, honestly, I didn’t know that film was based on a real book.

          Like

        • I recently viewed “Looking For Mr. Goodbar”. Wow, I didn’t know it was a film based on a book about an actual person. I don’t know, maybe she got too close to the flame she wanted to be burned by?
          As Nicole Kidman goes, I like when she’s in films that tell stories (which is often). Other than that great ass in “Malice” (my opinion!), I never thought about her body all that much. I just think she’s an unusual and daring actress, who I believe in. I don’t know, I think she’s awesome:-)

          Like

    • David Letterman Tom Selleck’s Indiana Jones Audition:

      Like

  70. Wasn’t primal fear a hit? Which was in between pretty woman and runaway bride. I remember shall we dance was also a success. But yeah, lately he hasn’t been in so many movies it seems. I didn’t like brooklyn’s finest, which i think bombed, and hachi: a dog’s tale didn’t get a wide release. What was his most recent?

    Like

  71. primal fear got good reviews but did decent business and that movie did more for edward norton getting although he praise he got a nod gere never did reviews said gere sucked the movie helped norton shall we dance did decent business BAD REVIEWS he hasnt been in any wide releases bee season flopped

    Like

  72. I know edward norton got most of the attention, but i thought you said earlier about diane lane in man of steel, lead or supporting, a hit movie will remind producers of an actor.

    Like

  73. shall we dance made 50 million on a budget of 50 million and bad reviews not a hit unfiathful got good review decent business helped diane lane not gere

    Like

  74. So why would man of steel help diane lane even though she wasn’t the star but primal fear wouldn’t help richard gere?

    Like

  75. but man of steel made money so it would be hit for her since she was involed. Primial did decent business but norton got the nod gere got nothing from the role. since the film just did ok business the only one had suncess from the film is norton since he got the nod from the film if the film made alot of money then yes it would be a hit for gere but it only did decent business

    Like

  76. man of steel made alot of money so its a hit to movie to the people involved primal fear just did okay business the only success it had was edward norton getting an oscar nod and that kind of sucess only realeates to norton he got the success from it just like diane lane just got success for unfiathful

    Like

  77. Shall we dance grossed about $170 million worldwide on a budget of $50, that’s a big hit. I don’t know if i would call richard a box office draw, but being the star of a hit movie must have helped him somehow.

    Like

  78. but gluestry primal fear did okay business only sucess it got was for oscar nob for norton would u say it helped gere career or count as a hit for him

    Like

    • It didn’t exactly hurt Richard Gere’s career either, that’s why I consider it a “stayed steady” film for him (it sure wasn’t “No Mercy”, though I did like “Power” more than most). I’d also like to add that I feel that those people who viewed “Primal Fear” enjoyed it (I recorded it over a decade ago; just a well done film, in my estimation).

      Like

  79. i dont remember shall we dance grossing that much ok that was ten years ago bee season flopped iam not there night in rodathia amelia all failure hunting party his career is done

    Like

  80. There’s no doubt his career isn’t in the best shape right now, but id say it’s far from done. He got good reviews and was nominated for a golden globe for arbitrage, I can’t see why directors would stop hiring him. I don’t think diane lane’s career is much better than his right now. Man of steel was a hit, but her role was small.

    Like

  81. it didnt help t geres career either it is a good movie reviews were good. but it didnt exactly make gere more of a draw and your right people liked it i liked however if u ask anyone about the movie u realize they talk more about norton then gere

    Like

  82. God, i still need to see primal fear! As a norton fan, i should have seen it already

    Like

    • I think it’s a must see anyways, but especially if you’re a fan of Edward Norton. “Primal Fear” was his breakout performance (funny thing: a friend’s wife says I remind her of Edward Norton).

      Like

  83. she has just as much screen time as crowe and almost as much as haenry cavill she had more screen time then u think plus abritage got good reviews but no one saw it i can assure u no one remembers it now producers probably forget about it abritage got good reviews but once again its a movie that help or hurt geres career got no publicity gere still hasnt had a hit in a while he is box office poison jumper although crap made alot of money helped daine career hollywood got good reviews people saidd diane was amazing in it

    Like

  84. u should norton best performance

    Like

  85. I haven’t seen man of steel, so her role could’ve been bigger than i imagined. But her role in jumper is small. She’s never the reason people go to see these movies. It’s decent work and it pays to be a part of it, but so far it doesn’t seemed to have put her back on leading lady status.

    Like

  86. right if gere was a ball player he would be getting base hits but no home runs at best his movies do average

    Like

  87. So do you think if richard appeared in a movie like man of steel it would help his career?

    Like

  88. right now shes comfertable in supporting roles she will get groove back and back to leading roles but u know being apart of a sucessfull movie even small part does more for actors career then lead in crap movies or movies that do decent business like gere is doing right now geres career needs help too

    Like

  89. yes i do it would help his career a small role in a hit movie gets u some reconized its not like diane lanes role in man of steel was a cameo she had a good amount of screentime plus it was her highest grossing film in her career maybe gere could play james gorden in batman vs superman movie it would help his career

    Like

  90. lets put it this way since u reaserached shall we dance was hit we will count it as one that movie was ten years ago his movie now r flopping even before shall we dance he had flops like mothmen. alot of crap is 90s too. some actors in the like travolta cage murphy and carrey had box office hits more recently then 2004 and there movies still outgross more then gere yet for some reason he is never on the list its weird

    Like

  91. i hope u r nothing like nortons in primal fear gluestery or i would be scared

    Like

  92. I hope diane lane will get out of mom roles. I loved her in unfaithful, career best work.

    Like

  93. well shes is getting old there are more roles written for older men then actress which is why actrors have longer careers then actress but if the material is good who cares if its a mom role costner is getting grandpa role in black and white yet reviews are saying its his best.

    Like

  94. rounders huh lets go to vegas gluestry

    Like

  95. she is a good actress she outacted gere gere always get upstage by his costars theres a reasons for that he is not a good actor. i hated the jackal first knight sommerby aututm in new york

    Like

  96. officer gentleman was lame didnt like it

    Like

  97. anyone seen pretty women good one of the few of his i liked funny thing is when that movie first started gere was a bigger star then roberts it sold on his name nine years later there next film runaway bride its polar opposite and and it sells on roberts name shes the bigger star now and her film career is overall better then his.she sells more tickets she dont have a chance to be on this list anytime soon, Its like honeymoon in vegas although cage is a bigger name then caan now caan was credited above cage in honeymoon in vegas even though cage had a bigger part cause back then caan was bigger star now if they both reteamed for a movie cage would for sure get credited before jmes them james movie career is in toliet and cage is doing better

    Like

  98. selleck does good in tough guy roles but no can do better then indy leabau would u say richard gere career is suffering he hadny hit a hit in awhile last ten years flop plus he had alot of flops in the 90s will u ever cover hi

    Like

  99. stallone is older then him and you still put him in the list. pLus if you reasearch geres career he peaked at an early age. After officer and and gentler he had alot of flops 80s then pretty women was his comeback. and more flops came then runaway bride was hit more flops came then chicago was hit more flops came his career has never been consitent he makes 1 hit then dosent make another one for a while just a bunch of flops i think he deserves to be on the list

    Like

  100. what about hugh grant his career is slowing down.

    Like

  101. chris o donnel after scent of a women people said he would be huge then batman forever came he was rising star but batman and robin killed his career then he made crap

    Like

  102. pacino turn down han salo and stallone turn down witness looking back today those would be weird

    Like

  103. no rush you can write them when your ready just giving ideas.i loved your hanks article . he is my fav actor his box office is still strong . IF you have the time you can write about jack nicholson in the a list i feel hes a rare actor who is over 70 yet still considered a list his latest lead role 07 made over 100 million his career is still going strong he might have the greatest resume ever even pacino and deniro have made questable choices but jack resume if better then them in terms of quality box office and awards. I might get hated for saying this lol .

    Like

  104. Top 10 Nicole Kidman Performances:

    There’s no doubt that this redhead is one of Australia’s greatest gifts to Hollywood.

    Like

  105. 10 Actors Who Were Robbed Of Iconic Movie Roles By Injury:
    http://whatculture.com/film/10-actors-who-were-robbed-of-iconic-movie-roles-by-injury.php/10

    1. Nicole Kidman As Meg Altman – Panic Room

    Often thought to be one of director David Fincher’s lesser films, Panic Room is – nonetheless – a tight and relentless thriller worthy of its runtime. The role of panicked mother Meg Altman brought a certain added resurgence to Jodie Foster’s career when it was first released back in 2002, and the movie also starred a young Kristen Stewart as her daughter. Originally, though, the iconic part was supposed to go to another actress entirely – one Nicole Kidman!

    Unfortunately for Kidman, however, she sustained a knee injury whilst shooting Moulin Rouge!, which left her unfit to take up Meg in Fincher’s movie. Looking back on Panic Room, then, it might have been interesting to see what Kidman would have done with the role, but we’re somewhat convinced that Jodie Foster was actually better for the part. Indeed, the character was actually rewritten to be “stronger” when Foster came on board; Kidman’s take was to be more “glamorous,” apparently.

    Like

  106. its like every movie she makes has oscar buzz then buzz fades away she gets snubbed for actress that had so much buzz she only 3 noms 1 win too golden globes love her though lebeau u think if bullock never made blind side she would be on the list and if affleck never made town he would be on the list mickey if he never made wrestler he be in it too

    Like

  107. Nicole Kidman’s Dad Dies Amid Aussie Pedophile Ring Scandal:
    http://www.lipstickalley.com/showthread.php?t=765842

    By: Sasha Sutton on 15th September 2014 @ 3.10pm

    The father of Australian-American actress Nicole Kidman died after suffering fatal fall at a hotel in Singapore whilst visiting his 44-year-old daughter Antonia who resides there with her husband and children, according to reports. But an article has surfaced stating that the 75-year-old had fled to Singapore after child abuse allegations were filed, linking him to an elite pedophile ring.

    Respected clinic psychologist Dr. Antony Kidman, who according to The Mirror was awarded an Order of Australia in 2005 for services to health, reportedly suffered a fall in his room at the exclusive Tanglin Club but died of a heart attack inside the hotel restaurant.

    Nicole’s publicist and close family friend Wendy Day told Daily Mail Australia that the Hollywood actress and her family are ‘in shock and grieving’, adding “I think that some time and privacy is needed to deal with this shock and tragedy”.

    Kidman’s U.S. publicist Leslie Dart echoed this in a statement: “Nicole and her family are in shock by the sudden death of her father. She appreciates the outpouring of support and kindly requests privacy during this very difficult time”.

    The Oscar-winning actress’ husband, country music singer Keith Urban, has cancelled a concert in the US to join his wife in Australia.

    The Strait Times reports that renowned clinical psychologist Dr. Antony Kidman; who has carried out scientific research in the field at Sydney’s Royal North Shore Hospital and was Health Psychology Unit at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), for over 40 years; collapsed at the social club’s Wheelhouse restaurant after completing his morning exercise.

    A doctor and members of the public who were present attempted to resuscitate Dr. Kidman before paramedics shortly arrived at the scene. The medics continued to resuscitate him as they took him to the Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH), however he was later pronounced dead. However, Reuters reports that local police are currently probing the ‘unnatural death’ of Dr. Kidman.

    But controversy surrounds Dr. Kidman’s death as Before It’s News reports that the clinical psychologist was linked to an elite Sydney pedophile ring and fled to Singapore amid sexual abuse allegations against him. A month prior, Fiona Barnett filed complaints to New South Wales police and the Child Abuse Royal Commission alleging to sexual and physical abuse against her by Dr. Kidman.

    The allegations were taken to the International Common Law Court of Justice (ICLCJ) in Brussels, which has been looking into Barnett’s allegations as well as testimonies from over 60 witnesses who have also detailed of an elite ring partaking child sacrifice, hunting parties and pedophilic activities which spans worldwide.

    Barnett, a whistleblower on the mind-controlling Ninth Circle Satanic Cult operated by Nazis and the CIA; and the shocking child abuse rituals many allege to take place within the group, came forward with a horrifying testimony implicating Dr. Kidman as well as two former Australian Prime Ministers.

    She recalled in her horrifying testimony, “In the late afternoon of October 28th 1975 I was taken to my sixth birthday party in the Kiama rainforest. The cordial was spiked with drugs. I fell asleep. When I woke it was dark and I was lying naked face-up, spread-eagle on a picnic table with my hands and legs tied. Perpetrators took turns sneaking up on me”.

    “They carried rifles and had a pack of starving Doberman dogs. I was told a group of naked children huddled nearby were my responsibility, I was to run and hide them. Every child I failed to hide would be killed and fed to the dogs. They painted something on my back and chest and then released us. The hunting party reached us… shots were fired and children began dropping all around me. With all hope lost of my saving the other children, I took off and ran for my life”.

    Barnett names Dr. Kidman as the main perpetrator, also trying to stop her from speaking out, in her sickening experiences at the hands of the child abuse network and that news of his death has certainly affected her. She detailed that she believes he may have been ‘sacrificed by his masters’, revealing in a Before It’s News report, “The main perpetrator of my child abuse, Antony Kidman, is dead after I filed complaints accusing him of rape, torture and murder of children in an exclusive Sydney pedophile ring”.

    “He subjected me to horrific sexual and physical assault… But there are even worse and more serious crimes against children that I have witnessed Kidman commit as a member of the elite Sydney pedophile ring”.

    “Kidman was responsible for ensuring that I never disclosed pedophile activities that I witnessed as a child – He failed. As a victim of mind control I feel he’s been sacrificed for failing to adequately program me”.

    Like

  108. kidman next movie will oscar buzz as usual then it dies out i think after her first win for hours she got greedy and tried getting nominated every year i noticed her film chocies after hours was oscar bait like spacey after americna beauty

    Like

  109. kidman would be good in superhero role lots of actress can do it it helped paltrow career

    Like

    • I always thought Nicole Kidman would take chances; she has no problem playing dirty!

      Like

    • In fairness, Nicole already did the superhero movie thing (granted, it was almost 20 years ago) w/ “Batman Forever”.

      Like

      • Nicole Kidman Has One Major Regret About Being In Batman Forever:
        http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Nicole-Kidman-Has-One-Major-Regret-About-Being-Batman-Forever-68178.html

        Remember that time Nicole Kidman played the brainy but beautiful love interest in a Batman movie? Neither do I, really, though Kidman has a pretty good idea why her character – Dr. Chase Meridian, from Joel Schumacher’s Batman Forever — ranks pretty low on the grand scale of Caped Crusader squeezes.

        The Oscar-winning actress was sprinting through her career with Yahoo Movies as part of the site’s Role Recall series. And when they got to 1995’s Batman Forever, Nicole Kidman didn’t have a ton of disdain for the experience, though she does admit:

        “I remember going, ‘I wish had more of a role, though.’ It’s great being the girl in the Batman movie…. But I’m an actor and you go, ‘Gosh I want more to do.’ So I would still love to do some sort of superhero movie where I get to do the cool stuff.”

        It’s rare that the women in the Batman movies got to do much beyond “be rescued” or “die horribly to anger our hero.” Yes, Michelle Pfeiffer and Anne Hathaway donned the Catwoman suit for alternate Batman films from Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan. But those are the exceptions that prove the rule carried out by the likes of Katie Holmes, Maggie Gyllenhaal or Kim Basinger in the initial Batman movie. Despite the fact that Nicole Kidman was asked to play a doctor in Joel Schumacher’s first Batman movie, she still had to deal with being dangled like bait as part of The Riddler’s grand trap… like any normal, campy Batman sequence. For real, this is atrocious:

        Not surprisingly, almost everyone bailed on Batman after Forever. Kidman ran for the hills. Val Kilmer hung up the suit, passing the cape and cowl to George Clooney. Alicia Silverstone and Uma Thurman stepped into the key female roles for Batman & Robin, and they were humiliated by Schumacher’s excess.

        I’m more intrigued by Nicole Kidman’s statement that she’d like to do something else in the realm of superhero movies. At age 47, she might be a little too old to step into the Ms. Marvel role over at Marvel Studios. But DC/Warner is setting up a massive cinematic universe, and there have to be multiple female roles outside of Wonder Woman that Kidman could fill. It could be payback for making her endure the layers of cheese in Batman Forever. Get her on the phone, Zack Snyder. Nicole Kidman’s ready to listen.

        Like

        • 12 Things Warner Bros Want You To Forget About Batman Movies

          http://whatculture.com/film/12-things-warner-bros-want-you-to-forget-about-batman-movies-2.php/4

          Dr. Chase Meridian’s Romantic Pursuit Of Batman (Batman Forever)

          Nicole Kidman’s Dr. Chase Meridian was clearly supposed to be an alluring sexpot of a character, but she ended up being more creepy than anything. For starters, she sets off the Bat-signal to lure the Caped Crusader to a rooftop, where she attempts to seduce him and shows just how sexually aggressive she can be.

          What’s even odder is that her behavior wins Bruce over, to the point that he plans to reveal his true identity to her in a declaration of love, all while Meridian, still unaware that Bruce is Batman, rejects Batman as she tells him that she’s fallen for someone else (Bruce, of course).

          Why Warner Want You To Forget

          It’s a clumsy romance and just really, really dull, all the more embarrassing because it stars an A-list actresses in such a forgettable part (thankfully for Warner). Batman’s cinematic romances have been a bit questionable at even the best of times, but at least the others weren’t this weirdly unsettling and vaguely disturbing.

          Above all, Meridian’s disposable nature just exemplifies the revolving door of women Batman has had in his life, something that’s becoming less and less acceptable on screen as the outcry for strong, well-developed, present female characters becomes louder.

          Though the Batman v Superman trailer already vaguely teases some frisson between Bats and Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), it’ll surely be handled with a ton more tact than Kidman’s possibly-nymphomaniac character.

          Like

        • Ha ha, that Chase Meridian character does have that quality that would make one say “whoa there, slow down”. Maybe it’s because I like Nicole Kidman, but I kind of enjoy her character in that film (I’m actually okay with “Batman Forever”).

          Like

    • Nicole Kidman Joins The Cast Of ‘Wonder Woman’ In Key Role http://bit.ly/1XKxHmb

      Like

  110. another villian role would be good for her she amazing in to die for she needs to take roles like that romantic comedy woundt hurt maybe make big budget movies instead of indies

    Like

  111. You missed a kind of important detail about ‘Fur’; Kidman wasn’t merely any old ‘neighbor’; she played legendary photographer Diane Arbus. The focus of the movie is her, not the hairy man. Her love for him sparks her fascination with misfits and oddity, and leads her to give up her conventional life to become a serious artist. I liked it, myself.

    Like

  112. still think a rom com would fit her well she should take a break from these off beat indies

    Like

  113. i could have seen her in platrow in iron man or even medas role in ghost rider costner did it helps a lot of roles

    Like

  114. Nicole Kidman and Reese Witherspoon to star in a limited TV series written by David E. Kelley:
    http://deadline.com/2014/11/nicole-kidman-reese-witherspoon-star-big-little-lies-limited-series-david-e-kelley-1201296852/

    The project, “Big Little Liars,” is based on the best-selling novel by Australian author Liane Moriarty about “three mothers of kindergartners whose apparently perfect lives unravel to the point of murder.” The project, which will be penned by Kelley and produced by Kidman and Witherspoon, will soon be shopped to various networks.

    Like

  115. In defense of Nicole Kidman…

    http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.com/2009/01/in-defense-of-nicole-kidman.html

    No star has faced more wrongheaded attacks over the last few years than Nicole Kidman. For years, she’s been chased by the label of ‘box office poison’, and further cries for her to be tarred and feathered have arisen after the expensive and artsy period picture Australia somehow didn’t equal its $130 million budget at the domestic box office (shocker!). The label makes no sense when you look at the facts.

    The biggest problem with Nicole Kidman’s PR-problems (to the extent to which they concern her at all) is that journalists and pundits lump her artsy movies (Fur, Birth, The Human Stain, etc) with her more commercial choices (The Golden Compass, Bewitched, The Interpreter, etc). Of course Fur wasn’t going to make $50 million. Birth, a dark, quiet drama about a woman who believes that her dead husband has been reincarnated in the form of a very young boy, was certainly not made with blockbuster dollars in mind. That would be like saying that Tom Cruise’s 90s hot streak ended with Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia, which ‘only’ made about $60 million and $28 million respectively in domestic theaters after a solid 8 years of straight $100 million performers.

    The other issue is that said people don’t realize that a star’s job is to open a movie, not make the movie into a long-range hit. Kidman’s purely commercial films over the last few years usually opened to a bit over $20 million (Bewitched, The Golden Compass, The Stepford Wives, The Interpreter). They all had mixed to negative reviews but none of them absolutely collapsed in the long run anyway. Their final grosses are anywhere from $60 million to $72 million. Ladies and gents, in this day and age, anything over a 3x multiplier for the opening weekend-to-final gross ratio is considered having legs. Australia opened over a super-crowded Thanksgiving weekend, which it was forced into when Quantum of Solace took over its original and more optimal November 14th release date (another aftershock of Warner Bros’s Harry Potter And The Half Blood Prince date change). It opened to a decent $14.5 million and has so far tripled its opening weekend gross. If it can make it to $60 million (possible, but not probable), it will have quadrupled its opening weekend numbers, which is a rare feat in any season.

    It is not Kidman’s responsibility that Australia cost $130 million, and it sure as hell isn’t Nicole Kidman’s fault that The Golden Compass cost $180 million (although should we give her equal credit for the $300 million that The Golden Compass made overseas?). And this goes for any actor in question. Unless they are producers and/or somehow contributed to cost overruns, actors are not responsible for the budgets of their films. Kidman would have given the same performance and pulled in the same opening weekend no matter what Australia cost. Is she more to blame because director Baz Luhrmann spent $130 million instead of $60 million?

    We don’t know how much she was paid for said films, I can guess that it wasn’t her normal asking fee (if I’m wrong about that, well, that’s what the comments section is for). So if we look at it objectively, we’ll notice that at $47 million thus far, the film will make about as much in the US as Moulin Rouge and has already out-grossed The Hours ($41 million). Heck, most of Kidman’s pure commercial ventures have averaged between $50-70 million, which is just fine if they aren’t costing more than $100 million. Not counting Batman Forever or Happy Feat, her highest grossing films were Cold Mountain and The Others, which made $97 and $96 million respectively. So why did anyone expect Australia to magically gross a third more than any Kidman-headlined film has ever grossed before?

    Nicole Kidman does not star in blockbusters and thus her films should not be held to blockbuster standards. In fact, she is a rare actress of her fame who fills her career with challenging, artistically worthwhile endeavors as opposed to trying to make money through various overtly commercial ventures. Not all of these artistic gambles are good movies, but she should be applauded for trying to use her star power to make interesting films. Instead she is criticized by unknowing pundits and gossip rags who expect every Nicole Kidman art house project to make Batman Forever level numbers.

    And finally, how do we not cry some form of latent sexism when Kidman gets blamed for Australia’s failure while Hugh Jackman gets to host the Oscars and emerges completely unscathed? I like Jackman a lot as an actor, and I find his choices interesting (The Prestige, The Fountain, etc), but why was he not equally tarred and feathered when Australia allegedly flopped? Was he labeled ‘box-office poison’ when The Fountain flopped last Thanksgiving? Was Brad Pitt labeled ‘box office poison’ after such artsy films as Seven Years In Tibet or Snatch? And how come Daniel Craig didn’t get ripped to shreds over the domestic failures of The Invasion and The Golden Compass (he co-starred with Kidman in both)?

    As for the article at Reuters that is linked above? Um… Crocodile Dundee’s last movie only made $25 million, and it opened to less than $8 million. I bet no one ever calls him ‘box office poison’.

    Like

  116. I think Nicole Kidman is the real deal. She is beautiful, smart and talented. I believe she has paid her dues and now does roles that interest her. It’s no longer about money or presdige but about art. It will be interesting to watch her career as she matures.

    Brad Deal

    Like

    • I agree. It was easy early on in her career to dismiss her as Mrs. Tom Cruise. But she’s proven she’s a great actress. Her movies may not be playing to wide audiences. But freed from the constraints of the typical Hollywood leading lady, Kidman is free to take chances. Although even when she was the prototypical A-list leading lady, Kidman was not exactly risk-averse.

      Like

  117. I wholeheartedly agree that Nicole Kidman is the real deal (I find the bulk of her projects interesting) and that she is fearless going about her business. I think she stands for what filmmaking should be about.

    Like

  118. Documentary claims Church of Scientology broke up Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman:
    http://www.lipstickalley.com/showthread.php/827000-Documentary-claims-Church-of-Scientology-broke-up-Tom-Cruise-and-Nicole-Kidman

    Documentary claims Church of Scientology broke up Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman by using aggressive intimidation tactics because they were ‘suspicious’ of the actress

    Going Clear, created by Alex Gibney, is an expose of the religion

    Film says head of the church David Miscavige was ‘suspicious’ of Kidman

    Marthy Rathburn, the second in command, was told to ‘facilitate’ the split

    Organisation wire-tapped Kidman’s phone and psychoanalyzed Cruise

    Tried re-educating the pair’s children so they would turn against Kidman

    A furious Miscavige condemned Cruise for his ‘sexual fetishes’

    The Hollywood couple divorced in 2001 – following the split Cruise became more active in the church

    A controversial documentary premiered at the Sundance Film Festival claims the Church of Scientology broke up Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.

    Going Clear, created by Alex Gibney, makes a number of startling revelations about the organisation – including allegations they used aggressive intimidation tactics to force the Hollywood couple apart.

    The film, based on the book by journalist Lawrence Wright, is an expose of the controversial religion – claiming that it evades taxes and abuses its members.

    Marty Rathbun, formerly the second highest-ranking official, claims he had been appointed to ‘facilitate the breakup’ because the head of the church, David Miscavige, was suspicious of Cruise’s second wife.

    Revelations: A documentary premiered at the Sundance Film Festival alleges that the Church of Scientology broke up Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman

    Allegations: Marty Rathbun (left), formerly the second highest-ranking official, claims the head of the church David Miscavige (right) was suspicious of Cruise’s second wife

    Kidman’s was listed as a ‘Potential Trouble Source’ because her father was a psychologist in Australia, according to the Daily Beast.

    Gibney’s film claims that Kidman, who was raised Catholic, convinced Cruise to distance himself from the Church of Scientology between 1992 and 2001.

    It also alleges that during the filming of Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut, Cruise wasn’t returning Miscavige’s phone calls, even though he was the best man at the actor’s wedding.

    Rathbun suggests this is when the aggressive campaign to tear the couple apart begin.
    It included wiretapping Kidman’s phone and psychoanalyzing Cruise and his movements around the clock.

    Concerns: Kidman (pictured with Cruise in 2001) was listed as a ‘Potential Trouble Source’ because her father was a psychologist in Australia

    Anger: The film alleges that during the filming of Stanley Kubrick’s, Cruise wasn’t returning Miscavige’s (pictured) phone calls, even though he was the best man at the actotr’s wedding

    The personal information they gathered was then passed to Miscavige who is believed to have condemned Cruise for his ‘sexual festishes’.

    Rathbun even states that the Church of Scientology ‘re-educated’ Cruise’s adopted children, Connor and Isabella, so they would turn against their mother in a bid to make Cruise’s custody case stronger.

    Before Going Clear’s first screening, HBO hired 160 lawyers to look through the film. It is expected to air on the channel March 16.

    The church also took out an advert in the New York Times claiming the film was a a Rolling Stone/UVA redux, even though they had not seen it.

    Despite the furor surrounding the production, Gibney hopes it will lead to more investigations and reports into Scientology.
    He told Variety magazine: ‘We hope that this film and Larry’s book will start the process where more media will say well we don’t care anymore. We’re going to pursue this no matter what.

    According to the credits at the end of the film, Cruise and Kidman refused to be interviewed.
    The pair divorced in 2001 and following the split, Cruise became more active in the Church of Scientology, receiving the church’s Freedom Medal of Valor in 2004.

    Friends: Cruise, left, embraces David Miscavige, the Scienology Church’s President of the Rulling Council during the official opening of a new Scientology church in central Madrid in 2004

    Like

  119. paddington made lots of money i t might not help make kidman a list since she wasnt lead it would made money with our without her but appearing a box office beats alternative espcailly or actor or actress in a slump or deemed box office poson . i never saw the movie but from what i heard she plays the villain so iam guessing has had lots of screen time

    Like

  120. Nine in Top 10 Worst Movies with Great Casts

    Like

  121. Future of Movie Stars: Who Will Shine? Who Will Fade Away?

    http://forums.previously.tv/topic/7750-future-of-movie-stars-who-will-shine-who-will-fade-away/page-12#entry1011201

    I think Amy Adams would be a better case study for that age group. I really think she’s someone who got screwed over by when she came to fame. If Enchanted had hit in 1997 instead of 2007, I think her career would have looked very, very different.

    I mean, it’s not to say that she isn’t famous, but she never hit unquestioned, A-list level movie stardom. And she totally could have done it.

    As for the “rush”…yeah, Kristen Bell got into this big rush in the few years after Veronica Mars ended, and she basically screwed herself by making so many terrible romantic comedies. I think she really did just take whatever she could, and unfortunately her choices for movies weren’t that good. I do think she’s been smart to get back into television as well as reviving Veronica Mars, but she did some big damage to her movie prospects.

    Someone once theorized that Kristen took so many shi**y movies so she could fund a Veronica Mars movie. Maybe they were right. LOL.

    I remember back at TWOP, someone theorized that it wasn’t just how crappy the romcoms were, but just Kristen Bell herself. Even though she looks like she should be the romcom heroine, she just isn’t an optimist at heart, and playing the plucky heroine just felt fake. There’s this brittle edge to her.

    It’s similar to why Nicole Kidman and Angelina Jolie just could never do the romcom thing successfully- they have this edge, and in Nicole’s case, an iciness.

    Like

    • http://forums.previously.tv/topic/7750-future-of-movie-stars-who-will-shine-who-will-fade-away/page-25#entry1874159

      I absolutely love Big Little Lies, and am totally excited about the show, but I think Woodley is a bit miscast. Or rather, miscast only because Nicole Kidman is also miscast. I feel like it has to be one or the other. It’s not unfathomable that they’d both have kindergarten-age children, but the age difference will look quite pronounced, I think. Kidman is a bit older than her character, if I recall correctly, while I think Woodley is a bit younger. As I was reading it, I pictured Felicity Jones as Jane and, luckily, Reese Witherspoon as Madeline and Skarsgaard as Perry. Pretty weird that two of those actually worked out. The supporting cast is great too, with Adam Scott and Laura Dern.

      Like

  122. Nicole Kidman’s fear of butterflies makes WatchMojo’s list of Top 10 Weird Celebrity Phobias

    Like

  123. Blockbuster Buster: The Stepford Wives

    Who knew this horror classic would be scarier as a comedy?

    Like

  124. 10 Great Actors With Over 30 “Rotten” Movies On Rotten Tomatoes:
    http://whatculture.com/film/10-great-actors-with-over-30-rotten-movies-on-rotten-tomatoes.php/4

    Nicole Kidman

    No. Of “Rotten” Movies: 32

    Nicole Kidman is a great actress; she’s shown us that time and time again. She is smart, beautiful and seemingly lovely, and yet the poor woman cannot seem to produce consistently good work. Everything she makes nowadays tends to stink, which is why a whopping 10 of her total 32 “Rotten” movies are from the past five years alone. Awkward.

    Once considered to be the definitive Hollywood actress, times have certainly changed.

    There was a brief run in Kidman’s career that could be considered rather majestic: Eyes Wide Shut, The Others, Moulin Rouge!, The Hours (for which she won an Oscar), Dogville, Cold Mountain and Birth – all in a row. This series of motion pictures showcased Kidman as the Hollywood’s most versatile actress, one capable of light and shade, dramatic and comic. Nowadays, with 32 duds behind her, Kidman’s career just looks messy as hell.

    Like

  125. 9 Actors/Actresses Who Can’t Headline Blockbusters Anymore:
    http://www.fame10.com/entertainment/9-actorsactresses-who-cant-headline-blockbusters-anymore/3/

    By James Sheldon on September 30, 2015 12:21 pm

    Nicole Kidman

    The Australian beauty (who was actually born in Hawaii) worked her tail off as a teenager to break into the film and TV scene in Australia. From 16 to 23, she scored several roles that helped her climb the ladder of success, and seven years in, she landed the role that would catapult her to stardom: Dr. Claire Lewicki in Days of Thunder. This introduced her to Tom Cruise, and within the year, the two were married. Nicole continued to grow as a box office draw, and her salaries continued to get larger… and larger. Nicole’s box office career peaked around the turn of the century with films such as Moulin Rouge and her Oscar winning performance in The Hours. At that point, her focus shifted in terms of the roles she was pursuing. She continues to work all the time, but simply doesn’t command the audiences she once did.

    Like

    • Re: Why isn’t she in more mainstream movies?

      http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000173/board/flat/257581745?d=257626140#257626140

      Yes she is not going to lead any commercial huge budget movie, if she wants to be in more commercial movies she must take small roles, I think Wonder Woman was a wasted opportunity, it could be perfect for her, a small but necessary part on the plot and not leading it she’s not carrying the thing, so its more “safe”, even that the movie turns to be bad I think will do good in box office worldwide so it was a real good chance but she decided to pick up other things, I know she is not getting bigger roles in big movies but in the end I think it is a lot more about her choices, not about her age or anything.

      Cate Blanchett is confirmed in new Thor movie. She is always doing something more commercial, she´s not leading it, but a good and important role in a movie like that could open more doors and opportunities. Is a interesting manner of how to manage a good career. But I don’t know sometimes I think she is so overthinking about her choices – Cate I mean – and so rational about the next step, it seems fake for me sometimes, bur its a good path, she can handle the small projects with the other ones, so she can be paid well and be remembered by younger audiences, my friends doesn’t know anything about Nicole’s movies anymore, the last one they remember about is Rabbit Hole because the Oscar nomination, since then they didn’t saw anything from her.

      Like

  126. birthday girl made 16 mill 13 mill budget thats not modest hit sounds like flop

    Like

  127. To die for also flopped 21 out of 20 mill budget sounds like flop

    Like

  128. Nicole Kidman will guest on #Empire after she stops living out her English fantasies: http://vult.re/1hmoNe3

    Like

  129. forrestbracket

    I noticed its like almsot every movie she gets oscar buzz then it golden globe nom but then movie bombs and she gets oscar snubbed. Every time I hear about her getting ocsar buzz i laugh.

    Like

  130. Nicole’s Film Career: Reasonable Expectations:
    http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000173/board/flat/247947572?d=247947572#247947572

    I believe it is pretty clear from the last at least five years (if not ten years) that Nicole’s film career is pretty much over. She’s a talented actress to a great many people, not just her fans alone. A lot of her admirers are respected directors, producers, actors and even critics. However, her “chemistry” in film does not work at all anymore.

    She’ll still be in films, I’m sure (Indies, like Railway Man, Strangerland and Family Fang, direct to Netflix and DVD). It’s just not reasonable to continue to expect theater releases, good box office or good reviews for her films; if we do expect these, we’re just not living on planet earth anymore.

    That said, I sure hope that Photograph 51 turns out to be very enjoyable. Hopefully her performances on stage in London will connect with audiences.

    Like

    • I don’t think her film career is pretty much over; it isn’t like she’s banned from making pictures or anything like that. I’m sure she’ll continue to be a part of films that maybe are under the radar, but interest her as well. I mean, I wouldn’t think she has to work for money at this point.

      Like

  131. I dont think she will ever be a list. Just wondering why is birthdya boy described as modest hit 16 mill off 13 budget is flop it should be noted in her bio. It should also be noted although to die for good flick it flopped

    Like

  132. 11 Movies Where The Reshoots Were Painfully Obvious

    http://whatculture.com/film/11-movies-where-the-reshoots-were-painfully-obvious.php/4

    The Invasion

    This near forgotten remake of Invasion Of The Body Snatchers starred Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig and it underwent a severe facelift during post production. The original director intended it to be a slow paced psychological thriller; one that would play on the audiences creeping dread. And initially the studio was completely onboard with that direction.

    Until they saw his cut and decided it was just too damn slow. The producer brought in the Warchowski Siblings to rework the movie, especially the ending and a new director was hired to sex up the action including a huge car chase towards the climax. Some glimpses of the original ending can be found in the trailer. They also gave the movie a happy ending that seems completely implausible, although it does argue that maybe humanity was better off with the invaders after all.

    The behind the scenes issues are clearly evident in the final cut. It’s a Frankenstein mash-up of slow thriller and noisy zombie movie; where quiet horror suddenly gives way to a jarring jump scares. There’s clearly a better version of it somewhere and what they added is distracting instead of exciting.

    “WARNING: this episode you are about to see does NOT feature the actual Cinefiles. These are actually replicants spawned from alien born pods. Although they may discourse on the original INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS and its following remakes, do not be alarmed. Just watch the skies. Dear God, please watch the skies.”

    Like

  133. Her current movie with Julia roberts her and julia are having heated arguments. NO surprise kidman is known to be snobby and arrogant,

    Like

  134. 10 Actors Who Hopefully Killed Their Careers In 2015

    http://whatculture.com/film/10-actors-who-hopefully-killed-their-careers-in-2015.php/7

    Nicole Kidman

    Now, this one really hurts, but it has to be said: Nicole Kidman’s career has been on a massive downward slide over the years. She’s had only a handful of critically-acclaimed starring roles over the last decade, and in terms of financial success, things are even more dire: she’s not had a single starring role that’s made any significant financial headway, though she has admittedly had supporting parts in successful films such as Paddington, The Golden Compass and Happy Feet (which nevertheless weren’t really sold on her presence).

    Kidman continued to keep herself busy in 2015, starring in the critically-panned financial bust Strangerland (36%), Werner Herzog’s surprisingly-reviled Queen of the Desert (6%), the broadly-acclaimed drama The Family Fang (78%, though it’s currently struggling to secure a release date), and the bland remake Secret in Their Eyes (41%).

    She’s no doubt a talented actress, but it’s depressing to see her pick so many uninspired projects. Perhaps she truly needs to pull a Matthew McConaughey, hitting rock-bottom so that she can see how much of a disappointment she’s been, and then she can rise like a phoenix, having her own “Kidmanaissance” down the line. As of right now, we’d rather she just stop than keep harming her brand with such a long streak of critical and commercial flops.

    Like

    • 10 Actors Whose Credibility Suffered The Most In 2015

      http://whatculture.com/film/10-actors-whose-credibility-suffered-the-most-in-2015.php/7

      Nicole Kidman

      Nicole Kidman could have featured on every version of this list over the course of the past decade, because here’s an immensely talented actress who doesn’t seem to be able to find her way into a good film. Remember that time when every film that Kidman put her name to was either a huge box office hit or a brilliant and unique indie flick? What happened?

      2015 has not been kind to Nicole Kidman. Presumably she thought that teaming up with one of cinema’s greatest auteurs would result in her having a masterpiece on her hands, but Werner Herzog’s Queen of the Desert is a boring slog of a film – one of his worst. A shame, really, when Kidman gives a great performance as Gertrude Bell. Still, it was ravaged by the critics (with just 7% on Rotten Tomatoes) and does not look set to tear up the box office.

      As if that wasn’t bad enough, though, Kidman also opted to star in the 2015 remake of Secret in Their Eyes, which was panned by the critics and subsequently flopped at the box office, and the questionable drama film Strangerland, which went straight-to-VOD.

      So, yes: another year, another parade of forgettable Kidman flops. Someone really, really needs to find this poor woman an agent – she’s worthy of so very much more.

      Like

  135. To Die for flopped

    Like

    • Please stop. You’re overusing the word “flop” for one thing. Box office analysis isn’t your strong suit. And I am reasonably certain no one cares. No more comments about what you think flopped for at least a month please.

      Like

    • Pamela Smart: Nicole Kidman was “embarrassing” and “one-dimensional” in ‘To Die For’ http://peoplem.ag/mDbnNV5

      Like

      • Well, it wasn’t supposed to be a dead-on impersonation (nor was Joaquin Phoenix’s portrayal of the Jimmy character), but satire. Although if someone spoofed me in a fashion similar in a Hollywood feature, I’d probably be pretty sore about it too (Pamela Smart did place herself in that position, however).

        Like

        • Right. Of course Pamela Smart is going to say that. I could not be less interested in the opinions of Smart as a film critic.

          Like

        • I totally agree; I mean, the relationship went sour, but did you really have to have him killed? Hey, at least in the film version of the circumstance she became an ice princess (thanks, David Cronenberg:-).

          Like

        • She’s not wrong that Kidman plays Suzanne as an airhead (which is a big part of the film’s unique appeal and satire) but I can’t say I have much sympathy for her.

          Like

        • Some stories are tragic, that situation with Pamela Smart (ironic name) isn’t one of them. Maybe she likes the Lifetime movie better (Helen Hunt plays her, and I like it).
          Wow, I learned Pamela Smart was released on parole last year. Well, usually I’m about second chances and cougars, but this time I’ll just stick with second chances.

          Like

  136. I just It made 20 mill of 20 mill budget i thought it was a flop you can admit clean and sober was defintly a flop. It made 8 mill off 12 mill budget

    Like

  137. Nicole Kidman.
    I was at the gym at the Carlyle hotel in NY. It’s a small gym and I was alone there. She comes in, I say “hi, good morning”. She looks at me and doesn’t respond.

    I finish my workout and say “see you around, have a nice day”… again looks at me and doesn’t respond.

    Apparently I’m cool enough to be looked at, but not cool enough to merit responses, eh bitch?

    Girl was the TOTAL opposite of Tom Cruise.

    Tom came to the hotel and I was on my way out at the lobby. He comes in, shakes the doorman’s hand, waves at the concierge and smiles, then comes towards me and shakes my hand too and smiles. He basically greeted the whole lobby before heading to the elevator.

    All I could think was “damn, I’m glad you divorced that f***ing bitch, bro.”

    Like

  138. Diamanda Hagan: BMX Bandits (1983)

    Like

  139. Would u say her Interpator co star penn ever reached a list. He had some hits but either he acted with more bankable actress like susan srandon or kidman or the movie did not heavily marekt his star power like mystic river and 21 grams, milk was modest hit. I am sam is only movie a person can say he opened.

    Like

    • I think it’s difficult to categorize Penn, since he’s gone in so many different directions throughout his career, and it doesn’t appear like he was going out of his way to be a movie star, but to do projects he was interested in (also, he’s done a lot of ensemble pieces). But I think his track record is good enough to be an A-lister; he probably has had the film career people thought Charlie Sheen was going to have.

      Like

  140. Stars who refuse to watch their own movies

    http://www.looper.com/14904/stars-refuse-watch-movies/

    Nicole Kidman

    In 2009, Oscar-winning actress Nicole Kidman admitted that, of all the movies she’s filmed, she’s only seen Moulin Rouge! and Australia. The reason: she did it as a favor to her director, Baz Lurhmann.

    Kidman recounted the horrifying experience of sitting through the Sydney premiere of Australia to The Daily Mail, admitting she “squirmed” in her seat throughout the movie. “‘I sat there and I looked at [my husband] Keith [Urban] and went ‘Am I any good in this movie?’ It’s just impossible for me to connect to it emotionally at all.”

    In fact, the whole thing was so traumatic, Kidman and her family actually fled the country to avoid reading any press about the movie. Given that it received mostly mediocre reviews, she probably made the right decision.

    Like

  141. The freaky vampire play Cuddles will get a movie thanks to Nicole Kidman http://on.io9.com/j6l6QMW

    Like

  142. 7 Dumb Things Celebrities Have Lied About

    http://www.fame10.com/entertainment/7-dumb-things-celebrities-have-lied-about/3/

    Nicole Kidman’s Use of Botox

    For years, Nicole Kidman denied ever having had Botox or any plastic surgery, but everyone knew better since she was in her 40s and had yet to have a wrinkle. Finally, in 2013, she finally admitted to having “tried Botox,” but insisted that she stopped hence her ability to move her forehead. Sigh. Botox and fillers aren’t a huge deal in Hollywood – everyone does it, so why deny it?

    Like

  143. Musical Hell: Nine (2009)

    A classic movie becomes a classic musical becomes a not-so classic movie.

    Like

  144. Nicole Kidman Returns to Australian TV for Top of the Lake: China Girl

    http://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/top-of-the-lake-china-girl/256208/nicole-kidman-returns-to-australian-tv-for-top-of-the-lake-china-girl

    Jane Champion will direct Nicole Kidman as she returns down under.

    Like

  145. Cast Of Practical Magic: How Much Are They Worth Now?

    http://www.fame10.com/entertainment/cast-of-practical-magic-how-much-are-they-worth-now/5/

    Nicole Kidman

    Estimated Net Worth: $130 Million. Nicole Kidman is one of the highest paid actresses in the industry now with 74 acting credits and numerous awards to her name. Her very first role was in 1983 and worked consistently through the ’90s with roles in Days of Thunder, Far and Away, My Life, Eyes Wide Shut and Practical Magical as Gillian. Her biggest roles came with films like Moulin Rouge!, Cold Mountain, The Hours and The Others just to name a few. Her iconic career is far from over and she is already sitting pretty on a net worth of $130 million.

    Like

  146. 15 Actors Who Desperately Need A Hit

    http://whatculture.com/film/15-actors-who-desperately-need-a-hit?page=3

    Nicole Kidman

    Nicole Kidman is a fascinating case study in failing upwards, because despite only a few of her last 20 movies actually turning any profit whatsoever, movie studios still love the star quality that she undeniably exudes.

    Her only recent hits are Paddington (where she wasn’t the attraction) and Adam Sandler’s Just Go With It (which was only a cameo). On the other hand, she’s endured a number of high-profile flops over the last decade, including Queen of the Desert, Grace of Monaco, The Paperboy, Nine, Australia and The Golden Compass.

    Kidman may have less of an incentive to change her strategy at this point, as she’s clearly favoring art above all else, and in almost every instance the box office bombing isn’t at all her fault. Still, if she wants to land more tent-pole work, she’s going to need to prove her worth eventually.

    Like

    • Star Derailing Role / Film Actresses

      http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/StarDerailingRole/FilmActresses

      Nicole Kidman’s career barely survived the failures of Bewitched, The Golden Compass, and Australia, but her next big project, Grace of Monaco, may have finally ended her reign as an A-lister after it suffered a bad Troubled Production, and ended up skipping theaters altogether and being dumped straight to Lifetime. Her following projects have been lower profile, with the exception arguably being Big Little Lies, an HBO miniseries.

      Like

      • Is her Hollywood career over?

        http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000173/board/flat/261692624?d=261692624#261692624

        Is it my idea, or this once upon a time popular actress is unwanted in Hollywood? All of the films she has done the last few years, are either small films or non-American. And even if she plays in “bigger” films, with more potential for commercial or critical success, it’s a failure (“Trespass”, “Grace of Monaco”).

        Looking at her career, the last big success she had as a leading actress was “The Others”, back in 2001. That was the last time that (many) people said “I’m gonna go to the movies and see a film with Nicole Kidman”. OK, and 2 years later she won the Oscar for “The Hours”, but that was more like an ensemble film, she wasn’t THE star of it. But ok, she won the Oscar, she was still popular.

        2003 was the last big year of her career. She played in “Dogville”, and the Oscar nominated epic “Cold Mountain”. Next year, she gave her last really good performance in “Birth”, and that was it. The failure of “Bewitched” in 2005 was the beginning of the downhill. “Invasion”, “Golden Compass”, “Australia”. Disasters, back to back.

        I watch a lot of movies, and I don’t even know what’s she has been doing the last 5 years. I recognize only a couple of titles, and the rest say nothing to me, I never heard of them. Only “Paddington” did somewhat OK, but not only she wasn’t the star of it, but who even remembers she was in it?

        And to consolidate that her movie career is over…she’s doing a TV series… And whenever a once famous movie actor is doing TV, you know what it means. I mean, can you imagine DiCaprio or Matt Damon or Ben Affleck playing in a TV show? TV is two things for a successful movie actor: the beginning of their career, and their pension.

        Well, it’s a pity, she’s a good actress, and her (big) career stopped in her mid-40s. It’s really true what they say, that there aren’t many roles for 40 years old women in Hollywood anymore. Hollywood is so cruel to age.

        Like

  147. https://www.datalounge.com/thread/17230897-nicole-kidman

    She looked great in Eyes Wide Shut — it’s been all downhill since with the fillers and refusal to grow old naturally.

    —Anonymous

    reply 30 7/15/2016

    Like

  148. Nicole Kidman Blind Item Reveals

    http://www.lipstickalley.com/showthread.php/1087866-Nicole-Kidman-Blind-Item-Reveals

    September 12, 2016

    Judging by how chummy she was being with a blonde haired man on the way to the elevator bank at her hotel in Toronto, the marriage of this former A+ list mostly movie actress who is an Academy Award winner/nominee could be in one of its frequent valleys. Nicole Kidman

    March 31, 2016

    This female director is very talented. One of my favorite directors and favorite people. She is very loyal so when starting her new project picked out all her regulars to act. Because of her recent bombs though, the studio also made her choose this seems like foreign born Academy Award winner/nominee. The pair can’t stand each other and even though it is the director’s project, the Academy Award winner/nominee is trying to get the director and the actresses she brought with her, fired.
    Sofia Coppola/Nicole Kidman

    December 29, 2014

    This actress is A list. She is married. She is an Academy Award winner/nominee. She also wanted a part very badly and was not being considered for it so she did the casting couch routine. Her husband has no idea. Nicole Kidman

    May 14, 2014

    Apparently the surrogate used by this A list mostly movie actress is out of money and is asking for more money from the actress. If the actress doesn’t pay, then she will have some explaining to do to the world because she said she was pregnant and didn’t use a surrogate. Nicole Kidman

    December 1, 2014

    This A list mostly movie actress and her A list singer might have been acting romantic while in public but then why the separate hotel rooms while out of the country on a trip? Not even the same suite. Barely the same floor. They only got together when they emerged in public. She just loves those cold and sterile relationships.
    Nicole Kidman/Keith Urban

    August 10, 2014

    This A list mostly movie actress who is an Academy Award winner/nominee had to have a page in a script rewritten while shooting because she was unable to smile as the script called for. Too much botox. She can frown though and do a grimace. Nicole Kidman

    January 6, 2014

    This still barely hanging on to A list Academy Award winner/nominee actress had her breasts enlarged from a small B to almost a D while she was out of the country. Apparently this has caused all types of issues for wardrobe for her new movie.
    Nicole Kidman

    January 3, 2014

    This A list mostly movie actress who used to be A+ and unfortunately by rule is not allowed to drop beneath B list was her usual miserable self the other day. While at the airport she had a group of staffers and her own bodyguards herd people out of the way so the photographer she hired could get clear shots of her family. The process took 15 minutes because she had to check the photos after every ten or twenty shots until she was satisfied. Nicole Kidman

    May 1, 2014

    This barely hanging on to A list mostly movie actress who is also an Academy Award winner recently shot a spread for a magazine. Her people made it very clear that our actress would leave if anyone smoked near her or even if they smelled like smoke. Our actress then spent the entire time in between photos chain smoking. She went through two packs in about three hours. Nicole Kidman

    January 26, 2012

    In honor of Australia Day, I thought I would make this blind item Australian. This actress is formerly A list, but now a good solid B. Back in the day when she got her role that made her internationally famous she got the role by sleeping with not just the casting director, but also this rounadabout Australian who was a friend of the director and was already bored with his wife. A further clue is this actress got naked in the movie for which she was cast. Nicole Kidman

    May 28, 2013

    “I would love to have another marriage where it is just about friendship and not always having to try and fend off a horny man. Sex is completely overrated. I have done my greatest acting when coming up with excuses.” A list mostly movie actress talking to her makeup artist last week. Nicole Kidman

    May 27, 2013

    This couple was at Cannes together for several days. She is an A list mostly movie actress. He is a celebrity. They not only slept in separate rooms, they slept in separate hotel rooms, and not even on the same floor. That is a very strange marriage.
    Nicole Kidman/Keith Urban

    February 1, 2013

    This A+ list all movie actress was asked to appear at an event. For charity. A well established charity. The actress said she would be happy to but wanted $250K for her appearance plus another $50K worth of stuff and only promised to be there for 30 minutes. She said her time is valuable and that no matter the cause, her time was more important. The charity declined and then found five other actors and actresses who were huge hits at the event and did it all for free. Nicole Kidman

    January 22, 2013

    Apparently this foreign born almost A list celebrity has talked to his A list actress wife about getting a divorce. Her response? It would be very inconvenient and that she is promoting a movie and would like to focus on that and her other movie coming out later this year and they can talk about it down the road. When this split does happen, it is going to be nasty despite how hard she will try to make it appear civilized. The things he wants to say. Keith Urban/Nicole Kidman

    September 20. 2012

    This A list actress broke up with one celebrity boyfriend because he wanted sex other than in just the missionary position. She says that is the only position she does except in a movie. Her celebrity husband must be thrilled
    Nicole Kidman/Lenny Kravitz

    July 15, 2011

    How would you like to be married to someone for a few years and have sex only a handful of times. Well, that is exactly the type of marriage a former A list movie actress and Academy Award winner/nominee has with her celebrity husband. They do always seem a little strained. Maybe a quickie would help. Nicole Kidman/Keith Urban

    January 26, 2010

    This married A list actress knows she is losing her popularity quickly. So, she has informed her managers to get her in the next Twilight movie. When they told her there were no parts for her, she said, “Well have them make up one or I will find new managers. Who wouldn’t want me in their movie?” Nicole Kidman

    September 7, 2007

    This A list actress was paid a substantial sum of money and got the rights to produce a movie which had been previously unavailable all for making some comments in a magazine interview.
    Nicole Kidman making some very positive comments about Tom Cruise and how he was a stud during their marriage.

    31 March, 2004

    Nicole Kidman : Acted the beard for Tom Cruise. Lesbian. Not a $cientologist–no, really! Temperamental; difficult to work with.

    Regular at certain L.A. girl bars. Forces her gay lovers to sign lengthy non-disclosure contracts before she gets involved with them. Is generally seen to have been the victim in the break-up of her marriage with Tom Cruise.

    The divorce reportedly was caused partially by Cruise’s insistence on raising the kids $cientologist (she wanted them raised Catholic) and partially because of her pregnancy, which may have been his and may have been Ewan McGregor’s. Recently rumors have begun to circulate in my direction that the relationship with Cruise broke up because of Kidman’s serial infidelity.

    Ate up the entire promotional budget at Cannes for Dogville by staying at the Hotel du Cap, so no party, no promotional items, nothing, all because Nicole had to stay at the best suite (one correspondent insisted that this was the fault of the studio & that Kidman gave better PR than a party would have). Bulemic.

    Linked with Ben Affleck, Jim Carrey, Russell Crowe, Vin Diesel, Iain Glen, Lenny Kravitz, Jude Law, Tobey Maguire, Ewan McGregor, Q-Tip, Naomi Watts (any chance you’ve got room in there for another girl? Please?) and Robbie Williams.

    Like

  149. I noticed with every kidman movie coming out it stirs up oscar buzz then she gets snubbed. She currently has oscar buzz for lion but lets wait and see

    Like

  150. Looks like has oscar buzz for lion. Its too early to tell but it would be good for her career

    Like

  151. How does Nicole Kidman keep working?

    https://www.datalounge.com/thread/18095987-how-does-nicole-kidman-keep-working-

    I don’t find her in he least interesting. Surely the abysmal Grace of Monaco (she suggested nothing of Grace) should have sunk her career, but she keeps piling them up – Queen of the Desert has not even opened here in the UK. She amused a bit in Paddington, but anyone could have done that. She even had a respected theater run in London recently. She seems to do anything, from The Paperboy to her latest projects. Do people really go to see Nicole Kidman movies?
    —Anonymous (40 views)

    3 replies an hour ago

    Like

    • Renee Zellweger’s Oscar

      https://www.datalounge.com/thread/18177478-renee-zellweger-s-oscar

      Kidman’s “career slippage” has to do with her choices of films (mostly flops) and her insatiable need to constantly work. If her career had slipped due to her Oscar win, she wouldn’t have been onscreen as often as she has.

      Moore’s career already mostly indie films by the time she won, but she continues to work.

      —Anonymous

      reply 10 an hour ago

      Kidman made the mistake of doing the horrible remakes of Stepford Wives and Bewitched right after her win. Can’t blame an actor for wanting to cash in on their win but the film has to be good. She’s gone the indie route last few years to her benefit and it looks like she will be getting her 4th nomination for Oscar shortly.

      —Anonymous

      reply 14 39 minutes ago

      Like

  152. Episode Thirteen: The Invasion

    http://www.flophousepodcast.com/2008/03/episode-thirteen-the-invasion/

    In our least-edited show yet, we discover that big stars, glossy production values, and a classic story can’t save you from being snatch’d by the Flop House, as we discuss The Invasion. Meanwhile, Elliott tries to sell us on his medical humor, Stuart imagines the

    Like

  153. Nicole Kidman is encouraging everyone to support Donald Trump http://pge.sx/2j4Symx

    Like

    • Blind Items Revealed #4

      http://crazydaysandnights.net/2017/02/blind-items-revealed-4-706.html

      January 13, 2017

      What do you do when you have given a million interviews over what seems like decades and no one cares anymore about what you have to say? You do what this A- list thetan level PR master of an actress does and that is toss in a few explosive names and ideas as well as some subjects that everyone wants to hear about from her but never will because she doesn’t know anything about them. But hey, at least she got the spotlight turned in her direction.

      Nicole Kidman (supporting Trump)

      Like

  154. looks like kidman is almost shoe in for Oscar nom

    Like

  155. kidman scored Oscar nom for lion this helps her career

    Like

  156. Drugs, sex, and Scientology: Nicole Kidman to ‘write a tell-all autobiography’ as insider confirms she could receive up to ‘$11million in sales’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4194308/Nicole-Kidman-write-tell-autobiography.html

    Like

  157. Blind Items Revealed #7

    http://crazydaysandnights.net/2017/02/blind-items-revealed-7-211.html

    January 25, 2017

    Apparently winning an Oscar nomination has not stopped the bizarre behavior of this actress who is out of the country and besides acting entitled has seemed wasted on something pretty much the entire time.

    Nicole Kidman/Paris Fashion Week

    Like

  158. What went wrong with The Golden Compass?

    https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/what-went-wrong-with-the-golden-compass-142743956.html

    The movie was handed a staggering $180m budget – the studio’s biggest ever – and Oscar-winner Nicole Kidman was cast as the scheming Mrs Coulter. Daniel Craig, the future James Bond, signed on to play the enigmatic Lord Asriel, and unknown 12-year-old Dakota Blue Richards agreed to play main character Lyra Belaqua, the Oxford orphan who finds herself on a Blakean odyssey through a sublime world of swooping witches, brave Gyptians and cruel clerics. After at one point walking away from the project for fear he did not have the experience to pull off Jackson-style feats of CGI genius, ‘About a Boy’s Chris Weitz agreed to return as director and main screenwriter. And that’s where it all began to go wrong.

    Like

  159. Gossip no one in Hollywood will say out loud ~~ Part 4

    https://www.datalounge.com/thread/18563375–gossip-no-one-in-hollywood-will-say-out-loud-part-4

    Nicole Kidman wins for most deluded. In her mind she thinks she is a major star. The bangs on HBO are to hide her lack of expression. She uses a glare now as her only acting tool!

    —Anonymous

    reply 498 19 hours ago

    Nicole Kidman wins for most deluded. In her mind she thinks she is a major star.
    I’ve been watching Nicole Kidman movies since BMX Bandits first appeared on HBO and that woman has never made choices like she thinks she’s a major star. She’s always been cautious about over-extending her perceived stardom.

    —I will ice skate over your corpse

    reply 501 18 hours ago

    Like

  160. How Many Times Does Nicole Kidman Have To Prove Herself?

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/annehelenpetersen/female-actress-good?utm_term=.vkAjJeWZW#.dgwDO6XKX

    Taking female actors seriously is hard work.

    Like

  161. ‘You really resemble a young Nicole’: Isabel Lucas is Kidman’s double as she sports curly red hair while filming Errol Flynn biopic in Australia

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4502300/Isabel-Lucas-looks-like-Nicole-Kidman-films-biopic.html

    Like

  162. How Nicole Kidman Hit the Peak of Her Career—Again

    http://www.instyle.com/celebrity/nicole-kidman-july-cover?xid=soc_socialflow_facebook_instyle

    She may be at yet another peak in her storied 30-plus-year career, but the greatest character Nicole Kidman has ever built is her own.

    Like

  163. The least believable accents in movie history

    https://www.datalounge.com/thread/18964112

    Nicole Kidman really is distractedly bad. She’s lived and worked in the USA for 30 odd years and still to this day can’t do a convincing accent? It was as bad in ‘Big Little Lies’ as ever, and when she tries other kinds of American accents (the old fashioned Gertrude Bell one in ‘Queen of the Desert’, the cringe-worthy attempt at Southern in ‘The Paperboy’) the results are even worse. Did she never have a coach? It’s odd because she doesn’t even naturally speak with a totally Australian accent these days anyway (I’m Australian and several of her vowel sounds are Americanized).

    What’s strange is that she seemed more consistent with it when she was younger, in movies like ‘Malice’ and ‘To Die For’ she maintains the accent for a bigger percentage of the movie. I like her movies but it makes her line deliveries sound even more forced when they come out in an uneven mixture of accents and pulls you out of the suspension of disbelief.

    —Anonymous

    reply 124 Last Wednesday at 10:31 AM

    Like

  164. The Troubled Production of DreamWorks’ First Film

    http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/the-peacemaker/265701/the-troubled-production-of-dreamworks-first-film

    DreamWorks launched in a blaze of publicity – but its first film, The Peacemaker, was beset by problems…

    Like

  165. Kidman and Sofia Coppola spoke to AP about their new film and the reinvigorated support of women in Hollywood

    https://t.co/DW9Z5Fmr2S

    Like

  166. The real reason Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise broke up

    http://www.nickiswift.com/38503/real-reason-nicole-kidman-tom-cruise-got-divorced/

    It was supposed to be a perfect match. Tom and Nicole, two young celebrities at the height of international fame, capturing our attention all throughout their marriage, which spanned the 1990s. They weren’t just well-known in their own right — they became a star couple, their union itself a lightning rod for media attention. They acted opposite each other in Stanley Kubrick’s erotic final film, Eyes Wide Shut in 1999, and were touted as a pair of sex symbols worthy of envy. They had children, they had fame. Seemingly, they had it all — and it all fell apart. Why?

    Like

    • So how did Nicole Kidman get out of Scientology?

      https://www.datalounge.com/thread/19545769-so-how-did-nicole-kidman-get-out-of-scientology-

      You kidding? She did everything not to be declared a Suppressive but it appears that even though she was never officially declared, she was treated as one anyway. The woman who was appointed to instruct the children later left the cult and says she had to pry on how they were feeling about Nicole and write a report if they had positive feelings about her.

      She lost her children!

      —Anonymous

      reply 9 31 minutes ago

      Katie Holmes’ father is a lawyer and he managed to convince her to wait before marrying Cruise until he could get an iron clad prenuptual agreement made. It must have been quite the negotiations because even after the Oprah couch jumping stuff they did not marry for a while.

      Holmes’ family was said to be devastated by her marriage to him and sent a note to their church members asking that they not discuss this difficult event with the media.(of course someone immediately leaked the letter.

      —Anonymous

      reply 15 15 minutes ago

      Like

  167. Nicole Kidman: I would “absolutely” do more television http://thr.cm/3ZjDdH

    Like

  168. Welcome to the Basement: BMX Bandits (1983)

    Like

  169. Nicole Kidman is getting dragged HARD on Twitter!

    https://www.datalounge.com/thread/19659657-nicole-kidman-is-getting-dragged-hard-on-twitter!

    I don’t dislike Nicole Kidman–she pursues riskier material than most other actresses at her level, and she can be quite good in the right role. That being said, I don’t enjoy hearing her speak publicly. She comes across as rather self-important and a bit entitled. Sorry to break it you, Mrs. Urban, but winning an Emmy isn’t going to do much to help women suffering from domestic abuse.

    —Anonymous

    reply 55 6 hours ago

    Maybe because Nicole Kidman has been an A-list for roughly thirty years and barely anyone knows who that actor is?

    So, let me get this straight, the race baiters took an issue that had nothing to do with race and turned it into a race issue? And are using the veil of inclusion and representation to bully a woman on Twitter for speaking longer than a man did?

    It’s such obvious hypocrisy. These people’s politics are convenient and only matter when it gives them the chance to air a grievance.

    It was so stupid of the Emmys to pander to this SJW mindset mostly because, even if you do everything right, have diverse presenters and winners, and rattle off how terrible Trump is, people who are perpetual victims will warp the truth in every way to allow them to keep being victimized.

    And in the process of accommodating this mindset, the Emmys alienated mostly everyone who isn’t a victim and the ratings plummeted as a result.

    —Anonymous

    reply 56 6 hours ago

    In Kidman’s defense, it’s true she did not deserve the award over Lange, but she couldn’t help it that she benefited from the most political Emmys ever. Almost every award was given for a political or affirmative action reason instead of merit. It was great for the award winners, but it really sucks for all the talented people who should have gotten an award last night but didn’t .

    —Anonymous

    reply 58 6 hours ago

    [R53], of course it’s not true. It presumes that Tom Cruise has the power to guarantee someone an Oscar, and yet he has never used this power to get one himself. He campaigned hard for each of his nominations, so we know he wants one.

    And it ignores the fact that Kidman had several viable opportunities to get an Oscar before “The Hours,” yet she was never even nominated until “Moulin Rouge!,” released after the marriage ended. And those films (To Die For, Portrait of a Lady) were released during the height of Cruise’s popularity and power in Hollywood.

    Even assuming that the Cruise-Kidman marriage was a sham contract, he couldn’t have promised an Oscar and she wouldn’t have needed that guarantee no matter her ambition. Being the wife of a Hollywood megastar even with the promise of a Rita Wilson level career would have been all she needed to sign on the dotted line.

    —Anonymous

    reply 64 5 hours ago

    [R61] Then it should’ve gone to Sarandon or Witherspoon.

    This “A list celebrity”, with her paid hype and press, came nowhere near Lange, Witherspoon, Coon or Sarandon.

    The four films she appeared in at Cannes earlier this year coupled with her fashion whoring really gave her the leg up this year.

    She couldn’t even drum up the enthusiasm Sarah Paulson did for her meh work in American Crime Story.

    What’s really irritating is that this monotone mess has given the same constipated performance her entire career, equipped with the same red-ironed-straight-to-a-fry hair, and because she’s managed to turn herself into a “fashion girl”, noticed more for her dresses than her work, she’s suddenly “one of the greatest actresses ever”. Seriously, 😂.

    —Anonymous

    reply 65 5 hours ago

    I think Nicole deserved it for Big Little Lies which was an interesting and timely show with a very hot topic right now – domestic abuse. I only watched a couple episodes of Feud and I can see myself eventually trying to catch up on the rest but I didn’t find it as compelling. It felt like the actresses were playing dress up. Another mistake was hiring Susan Sarandon who’s become more & more toxic lately. Anyone associated with her was bound to burned too.

    It’s not Nicole’s fault that the This is Us star got played out. It was the camera man who decided to do that disgraceful long shot. I’m not sure what Sterling did to piss off the camera man but that was incredibly rude.

    —Anonymous

    reply 75 4 hours ago

    Like

  170. ‘She said, “You have never been given things on a platter, you worked hard”’: Nicole Kidman recalls how her mother Janelle persuaded her not to QUIT Hollywood

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4923448/Nicole-Kidman-recalls-reveals-QUIT-Hollywood.html

    Like

  171. Three board members of Harvey Weinstein’s company QUIT ahead of internal inquiry over sex abuse scandal while stars like Meryl and Nicole stay silent and offer no support to accuser Ashley Judd

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4957558/Hollywood-quiet-Ashley-Judd-Harvey-Weinstein-claims.html

    It has been over 24 hours since Ashley Judd and a number of far less famous and much less protected women came forward to share allegations that they were sexually harassed by movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. And A-list actresses like Meryl Streep and Nicole Kidman, pictured right, and Gwyneth Paltrow who use their platform to encourage and support women responded by saying nothing. They are not alone in their silence either, as many other women who have long sung the praises of Weinstein while speaking out against harassment have also gone mute, including: Julianne Moore, Cate Blanchett, Renee Zellweger, Angelina Jolie, Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz, Toni Collette, Minnie Driver and Uma Thurman. The Weinstein Company Board was far more vocal on Friday meanwhile in their decision to indefinitely suspend the serial sexual harasser, who has claimed he will be seeking treatment. Three board members also stepped down. Some stars including Patricia Arquette and Brie Larson have broken rank and praised Judd for coming forward, pictured left.

    Like

    • Hollywood’s Loud Silence on Harvey Weinstein’s Sexual Harassment Allegations

      https://www.datalounge.com/thread/19772180-hollywood%E2%80%99s-loud-silence-on-harvey-weinstein%E2%80%99s-sexual-harassment-allegations

      In the wake of the blockbuster Times exposé, The Daily Beast reached out to dozens of prominent actors, actresses, and filmmakers—who both have and have not worked with Weinstein—only to receive many replies of “no comment” and plenty of radio silence.
      One of the only members of “liberal” Hollywood to speak out about the disturbing Weinstein allegations was Lena Dunham, who did so through Twitter.

      Like

      • https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/omni-thread-celebrity-responses-to-harvey-weinstein-scandal-latest-kidman-summoned-in-night.1281307/page-7#post-32904067

        Italian model says Weinstein boasted he slept with stars | Daily Mail Online

        An Italian model told last night how she was subjected to a series of ‘sleazy and predatory’ sexual advances by Harvey Weinstein, who boasted he had slept with several A-list actresses – and even summoned Nicole Kidman in the middle of the night to ‘prove’ his power over leading film stars.

        ‘From the moment he walked on to the boat I could see him leeringly appraising my body,’ she said. ‘Weinstein was sitting next to me, making salacious comments about wanting me and doing nothing about preventing the other guests from hearing.

        ‘He was grossly overweight, sweaty and wearing a T-shirt with his stomach protruding from it. I found him repulsive.’

        Ms Panagrosso said that previously Weinstein had tried to force himself on her in the pool at the Hotel du Cap-Eden-Roc and boasted he could easily ‘get what he wanted’ from another model who was also there. That model later went to his room for a ‘screen test’, Ms Panagrosso claimed.

        ‘I was firm in my rejection of his advances,’ she said. ‘He told me he could make me a star, but I had no interest in becoming an actress so there was nothing he could offer me that could make him seem appealing.

        ‘It didn’t seem to matter. It was as if my saying no just made him more excited. Suddenly he got down on his hands and knees and told everyone, “Look, I’m Sam’s dog.” Everyone was laughing, but I felt deeply uncomfortable.’

        She said Weinstein later ‘named several A-list actresses he claimed had willingly slept with him’. ‘I told him I didn’t believe him, so he said “OK, I’ll prove it”, took out his phone and called Nicole Kidman,’ she revealed.

        ‘It was late at night, but he asked her to come to the boat, and she did. They walked off by themselves and when they returned, he told me they’d kissed.

        ‘I don’t believe it was true or anything took place, or had ever taken place, but the fact she appeared at his command shows how powerful he was. In the film world, he was the puppet-master and everyone was his puppet.’

        Ms Panagrosso claimed the producer turned up in her cabin on another night with baby oil and medicine after she complained of feeling unwell.

        ‘I couldn’t believe his arrogance,’ she said. ‘He pushed me on to the bed and put his hands all over me, including my breasts. He is a massive, strong guy and I was trying to push him off, but I couldn’t.’

        Frightened, she told him to stop and he left. When she told friends about the assault, they shrugged and said: ‘That’s Harvey.’

        ‘Everyone was complicit,’ she said. ‘The imbalance of power between men and women in so many industries has gone on too long. There’s strength in numbers and by standing together, women can start to change that.’

        Like

    • ‘Make sure you are protected, don’t let anyone break your spirit’: Nicole Kidman advises young Hollywood women as she speaks out on Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment scandal for a second time

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4977634/Nicole-Kidman-advises-young-women-amid-Weinstein-scandal.html

      Like

  172. Is Nicole Kidman now a legendary actress?

    https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/is-nicole-kidman-now-a-legendary-actress.1277010/

    Ya’ll may groan and call me blasphemous but Nicole is still going strong in Hollywood and getting diverse roles and she’s 50! Sure she’s not at Meryl’s level yet or may never be but she’s not far off imo.

    How many actress’s her age (only comparing her to other white actresss) are getting roles like ‘Celeste’ from “Big Little lies”??

    Meryl gets diverse roles compared to others her age, Nicole similarly is now in a unique position from her peer group.

    She’s won an Oscar, Bafta, Golden Globes and now an Emmy. She’s also won countless other critic choice awards in her career. Nicole is on her way to legendary status I believe if she isn’t there already.

    I’m shocked because I seriously thought her career wouldn’t amount to much after her divorce from Tom. But she’s become a pretty great actress. Never used rate her as an actress until i saw “Hours” tbh.

    Like

  173. Nicole Kidman Speaks Out Against ‘Abuse and Misuse of Power’ Amid Harvey Weinstein Scandal

    https://t.co/O3lWJkahpN

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s