While I'm not a big Kidman fan at all, I think that the article sounds quite mean spirited. She needs a breather definitely, but no need to retire. I've said before she seems to be floundering, but it's got nothing to do with her acting chops. Sometimes movies sound great on paper when actors sign on then it's re-written and/or poorly handled by a director and such, and ends up terrible.

I actually sort of liked Invasion to an extent. It is a frustrating movie because it got a hachet job done to it by the executives and producers who forced mind boggling re-shoots, and added too much blockbuster style content to a film that had promise as a lower key eurostyle sci-fi thriller. My sister who groaned her way through the movie would disagree with me. But I'm more of a Daniel Craig fan so I saw the glass half full on that one.

I'm hoping Golden Compass will break her streak, and not become a victim of it.

Reply

Some may hate Cruise but the fact is without Cruise Nicole Kidman would have been unheard of.
To be honest Im not a fan of her beauty and acting either but it also boils down to good materials.
She has the Oscar curse because many actors and actresses who win later on do crappy movies.

To be fair on Kidman's part the men open better box office wise but actresses lately dont. Scarlett,Alba,Cameron Diaz,Garner,Swank,Theron,even Angelina Jolie,McAdams,Weisz,Knightley etc isnt a draw anymore. The last hit of Aniston was the break up but she's had many misses at the box office too. We'll see how Rendition opens for Reese Witherspoon.
It also does not mean working too much you are successful or hot property. At times overexposure can ruin your career. I recall last year it was annoying to see Scarlett everywhere on magazines,TV and too much of her in the movies.

Reply

The Guardian review was a bit harsh, but the basic point is right. People who edit fashion magazines like Nicole Kidman, but not many others do. She is no longer attractive, and she hasn't had a good movie in years, more than a decade I think. The last one I saw her in that was worth seeing was Malice, and that was well over a decade ago.

Reply

It may have been a tad harsh, but he speaks the truth.

Reply

Read this article by a female editor when Kidman did that Vogue spread and that creepy Maggie Gyllenhaal Provocateur ad...its powerful and I agree its demeaning. EVery actress should read this!!!!
http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,2163280,00.html#article_continues

Now how creepy and unsexy is this?
http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtmt?pk=2833&linked_from=recent_comments_box

from EW:
http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2007/09/maggie-gyll-lin.html

Reply

I'm really surprised by this article because I think Nicole Kidman is one of those beautiful and talented actresses today. She's been in some of my favorite movies of the last few years....Moulin Rouge, The Others, The interpreter. I just saw Invasion the other day and thought she looked amazing. The movie itself wasn't earth shattering but it was a good movie. Her career is better off than Tom Cruise if you ask me. What has he done besides lame and unoriginal action movies in the last few years? His new one looks more interesting I'll give him that, but don't even try to say Nicole wouldn't be successful without Tom. Many of us prefer her to him anyday.

Reply

I prefer Tom as an actor and entertainer than Nicole and many do. Some that loathe him read too much trash tabloids. The last film I saw of Kidman was Bewitched and it was bad. Tom on the other hand is a pop culture of America and his movies are classics like Top Gun,Interview with a Vampire,Risky Business,Magnolia,Collateral,Mission Impossible,Last Samurai,Jerry Maguire and many others. Im dying to see Valkyrie. As much as I think Lions for Lambs is good I stay away from war films because my cousin is in Iraq so I keep up with the news because I have to but for entertainment wise I get depress.

Reply

What planet are we all on? by now, everyone should have realised that Patterson is not and never has been a fan of Kidman. He comes out with this kind of piece every year or so. Last year, his piece was on David Thomson's biography on Kidman, the year before that or so, it was about other people more talented than her. This piece is not something that he just thought up, he does it every year. If he hates her so much, why not just refuse to watch her films, there are other critics on the Guardian.

As for Kidman being in a dreck, do people actually think she is not doing what she wants? she is working with people she wants to and making movies that she wants. The only sub-par/awful movies she has made have been TSW, Bewitched, Invasion all between 2005 and 2007, you'd think she spent the past decade in a slump, these are pretty much the mainstream movies that the studios more or less butchered on their way to the screens, funnily enough, the directors, producers don't get any of the blame.

Ryan, were you expecting Hirschbiegel to have delivered the Invasion that was released? did anyone think it was a bad idea for her to work with him? And yet, it is Kidman who seems to be getting the rap for the fiasco that was released. Does anyone actually think it's fair? how many times had Cinematical grumbled that WB was playing around with the movie and yet when the movie was released, all was laid on Kidman's feet and there was not one piece from you guys to say "hey, Warners, what have you done?" What was Silver's excuse for the movie?

TSW was a Frank Oz movie, was anyone expecting Oz to have made the bad movie that he did? Isn't he supposed to be one of the best dark comedy directors around? nobody blamed him for that fiasco, it was all Kidman. It was only last month or so that Oz declared that the failure of the movie was all on him due to his decisions.

On her prestige projects, she has worked with Baumbach, Shainberg, Benton, Minghella, Glazer, which of these directors should she have said no to? what were her performances like in the movie these directors made? did she sleepwalk through them or did she actually do her job? This is a woman who takes her talent on set and does her job? Is she the only one who makes these movies on her own?

I have enjoyed Kidman in Birth, Fur and will probably enjoy MATW, too, because Ryan, her performance is getting fantastic reviews. Here is Ryan droning on about MATW being awful, what exactly did you say to Baumbach when/if you had the chance to talk to him, Michelle, your colleague did and she sure interviewed him as if she got it, if she thought it was awful, too, there was nary a peep from her to show that.

Seriously, you reviewers, writers on film are all like each other so going on about Patterson's piece as being mean-spirited is a bit hypocritical.

As for the idea that she would have been nothing without Tom Cruise, perhaps, because she would have been something more substantial without all the drama. Kidman will continue to have successes and failures, it is about time people who write on films realise that of filmmakers.

As for Patterson and his piece, apart from one mention here and there, it will be forgotten soon enough like the others. I guess, whether he likes it or not, there is something in his subconscious that tells him that Kidman is something that he can't let go off. Isn't this the kind of thing written about her in the 90s?

Seeing Kidman this weekend at the NYFF, this drama seems the last thing on her mind. Let the woman do what she wants, she has been doing it since she was 14 and will probably outlast most of her colleagues.

If MATW turns out on the award circuit in any capacity or TGC does well, these piranhas will be singing a different tune.

And Ryan, not every movie will be to your taste so climb down your three legged chair a bit and chill out.

Reply

Bye Nicole! Hellooooo Katie Holmes! lol!

In all seriousness here, Nicole is overpaid and I dont get it why studios keep hiring her likewise with Jessica Alba who till this day cannot act. I have seen prettier women than Alba. I even give credit to Jessica Biel who is improving acting wise.

Reply

I agree with akilis- everyone seems to be assuming that the success or failure of a movie is either due to the star actor, or it is something said actor should have seen coming. [Incredulous pause.] Where did THAT come from? And what does it have to do with logic?

True, a totally brilliant performance can make a bad movie into an okay movie. However, one good performance is very unlikely to make something bad into a blockbuster. Also, consider the role of directors, co-stars, the plot, and general atmosphere in evoking those brilliant performances. In general, creative energy has a really hard time coming out of a vacuum.

As for whether Nicole should have seen those movies as bad news and avoided them... I think in this debate it's too easy to fall prey to hindsight. It could have looked great at first, as akilis pointed out, but maybe it was marred by bad directing, budget cuts, studio interference, or something else. Whether that was the case or not, expecting omniscience (even from Oscar winners) is a bit much, don't you think?

Let's at least be reasonable in what we expect. Since she's [presumably] not psychic and they haven't bottled perfection yet, I don't see why we feel entitled to demand those qualities in her. [Geeze! No wonder modern women have self-confidence issues!]

Reply

I agree with everything Akilis and Sara wrote. I want to add that Margot at the Wedding is getting plenty of very positive/great reviews, just like Nicole Kidman's performance in that movie, so I think it's just a matter of taste. For example, I consider Dogville a masterpiece, Birth a great movie, and enjoyed watching both The Interpreter and The Human Stain...

Reply

Skanky old whore and the NKU gang invade. YAWN.

Reply

I don't know why some of you put down Nicole. She's one of THE most classic actresses of all time. I look forward to watching her in http://www.margotatthewedding.com

Reply