Forum Replies Created
November 12, 2018 at 5:58 pm #1202673786
I know what sexuality is. And “sexy” is subjective anyway. I’m sure there are people that think of Meryl as such….and dont think that way about Nicole. But like you said….it is what it is.
Fair enough. I added another bit to my previous post about Jessica Lange, in case you are interested.November 12, 2018 at 5:30 pm #1202673754
Maybe because Nicole is viewed as this Hollywood beauty that you can see her as “sexpot”. That was never Meryl Streep’s category, even though I think she was quite pretty….and actually can sing. She could pull off Eyes Wide Shut……even Glenn Close pulled off sexy in Fatal Attraction until she had to go psycho.
I’m quite sure that she could pull off sexy if it called for it.. and that’s why she has 20 something nominations…..because she gets it done.
Sexuality isn’t about looks. It’s deeply personal. Playing that side of yourself is exposing. It’s risky, particularly if you are a “serious” actress with a reputation to protect (Sharon Stone was forever tainted with the titillating aspect of Basic Instinct. Demi Moore could not quite get over her “sexy” persona in things like Disclosure).
It’s not as easy as you think to go there for a serious actress. There are all sorts of risks and complications attached.We will never know if Streep could have tapped into a sexual or risque aspect of herself, because she never took the risk. It is what is it is.
Streep always used to claim to having a bit of admiration/envy towards Jessica Lange in their 80’s heyday. I’ve always suspected that was partially because Lange was so much more comfortable playing her sexuality than Streep was. You’d think the supposed greatest actress in human history would think covering roles that explored female sexuality might be something she should have prioritised at one point, but apparently not.November 12, 2018 at 1:57 pm #1202673602
Meryl could play all of Nicole’s roles with ease, but I cant imagine Nicole pulling off a lot of Meryl’s roles as well as Meryl.
That’s not even remotely true. As another poster pointed out, Streep doesn’t have sexy/risque in her arsenal/toolbox. Kidman does
I can’t see. Streep in Moulin Rouge, Eyes Wide Shut, The Paperboy…the idea of Streep trying to play a sexpot at any age seems ludicrous. It’s probably just not something she’s comfortable with. For all her technical range, there are some things Streep studiously avoids, and that is one of them.November 11, 2018 at 9:28 pm #1202673083
I think Kidman has demonstrated far more range over her career than you suggest (or have maybe seen). And while her default mode may be classy, regal etc, she’s easily broken out of that mode many times at will.
For her SAG nominated role in The Paperboy, Kidman played a loud trampy Southern tart with a fetish for convicts and a porn star aesthetic…the complete opposite of any icy or regal persona, and she pulled it off easily. It’s also the kind of role, that for all her fabled versatility, that Streep has never played. I just can’t imagine Streep looking like a porn star and peeing on Zac Efron in any movie.
Last year Kidman played a screaming 70’s Croydon punk rocker in John Cameron Mitchell’s How To Talk To Girls At Parties. Again, complete opposite of anything icy or regal. And most critics said she was the best thing in the film (I’ve seen it and can confirm she is).
Kidman has yet to play a man, though she was trying to for several years (Kidman was trying to play Eddie Redmayne’s role in The Danish girl, but could not get the movie funded). So she certainly has shown ambitions to test her range to it’s very limits.
She’s not playing a man in Destroyer, but in the majority of reviews, her performance is being compared to male actors. DeNiro, Pacino, Eastwood etc. Which is interesting, and something I’ve rarely seen in reviews for actresses,even ones as rangy as Streep.November 11, 2018 at 8:46 pm #1202673059
you honestly think Nicole has shown the amount of range that Meryl has?!!! come now.
Her performance in the Devil Wears Prada was COMPLETELY different from… say…Doubt….which was completely different than her performance in One True Thing. they felt like 3 completely different people. Nicole’s characters feel detached in a way, imo. But that’s her style and I do think she is a very good actress.
Cate Blachett is much more of Meryl than Nicole.
How is “range” even a question for Kidman at this point? Especially this year. She’s got 3 different movies out this winter alone (Boy Erased, Destroyer Aquaman), and none of her characters in them look, sound or act remotely similar.
To Die For, The Hours, The Others, Moulin Rouge. Four completely different characters.
I think Kidman is a different type of actress than Streep. More interior. Wheras Streep seems to work from the outside in (Blanchett’s approach seems similar, so I can agree she is stylistically more similar to Streep than Kidman). But yes, I do think Kidman has comfortably shown as much range over her career.November 11, 2018 at 7:34 pm #1202673004
And now the conversation is just ridiculous.
Meryl is a truly great actress, but getting nominated every time she takes a shit for her entire career has made her fundamentally overrated (not her fault though). And it allows some non-critical thinkers to fall for the propaganda that she invented acting. Repeat after me: Streep is not God.There are probably at least 15 or more working actresses as talented as Streep, and Kidman is one of them. Unfortunately, it’s reflected in no one else’s nomination count, but even in her own generation, Lange, Weaver and Close had as much ability as Streep….they just didn’t have AMPAS nominating them for breathing.
There wasn’t much disparity between Kidman and Streep in The Hours (where Kidman won an Oscar), and I’m fairly certain we’ll see there’s no real gap in talent between the two in Big Little Lies Season 2. No one is expecting Meryl to show up and blow Kidman off the screen. It’s just propaganda at the end of the day.November 11, 2018 at 5:06 pm #1202672856
How is this even a serious discussion? I had no idea anyone who knew anything about films or acting could regard Julia Roberts as a better actress than Nicole Kidman. I think even Julia Roberts would tell anyone that Nicole Kidman is a far more gifted actress than her.
There are levels to this shit. Julia Roberts is a movie star with very limited range who can act a bit (try to see Roberts act on stage or do a period role like Mary Reilly…the results have been ugly). Nicole Kidman is a character actress who was born good looking enough to be considered a movie star.She’s superb on stage and film, and there is little she cannot successfully tackle. But Kidman’s skill, range and talent are of a completely different order to Roberts.
Kidman, talent-wise plays in the same ballpark as people like Meryl Streep.She is an Actors actor.
Roberts is a solid actor of limited range and massive charisma, who has to be cast very specifically or risk being totally out of her depth. There is no comparison between the two.
And I say this as someone who has been recently watching Homecoming and think Roberts is doing some of her finest work….but just no. A terrible hottake.
Julia is an iconic movie star. But that does not automatically make you an Actors actor. John Wayne may be the most iconic movie star of all time, but in many respects he could be considered a mediocre actor.
Roberts is a fine enough actor, a terrific movie star and she’s had a great career. That should be enough. Not everyone can compete with the talent of the greatest actors of their generation (for Roberts generation, someone like Kidman or Blanchett is in that zone) and that’s OK. Robert Redford is not a loser because he was never going to be as talented an actor as DeNiro, Pacino or Hoffman.November 11, 2018 at 7:01 am #1202672598
I think The Hollywood Reporter Roundtable will be a better platform to campaign since it’s the one almost everyone is excited to watch and see, including me. Personally i didn’t know LA Times had a roundtable. About Nicole she really needs to campaign, because i don’t think Destroyer will have a big push by Annapurna. And let’s not forget that all three major movies from Annapurna (Vice, IBSCT and Destroyer) are all coming out on the same day. And the former two are big contenders for BP while Destroyer isn’t.
So far Annapurna seems to have been doing more to promote Destroyer than Vice. They are doing a tonne of Guild screenings and Q & A’s, Kidman has been booked for an AFI Gala event just to discuss Destroyer. Kidman will have BAFTA event dedicated to her a few days later where she can promote Destroyer some more.
They even had Sebastian Stan on Jimmy Kimmel this week promoting Destroyer, and the film isn’t even on limited release for another month. All this concern that Annapurna won’t expend any cost or energy to promote/campaign Destroyer seems misplaced. I don’t see what more Annapurna could be doing right now.November 11, 2018 at 3:46 am #1202672494
I can’t with the Black Panther bias. Why is Lupita there? I love her, but this is wrong.
There’s always someone on these roundtables with zero chance of being nominated, so it’s sort of to be expected. Lupita is that person (though I think Ronan probably hasnt got much chance either the way her studio avoided the early fall festival circuit like they were afraid of catching herpes).
All Lupita’s presence shows us that Disney/Marvel is taking their Black Panther campaign extremely seriously, and flexing their muscle by getting total non-starters like Lupita ( only the third most buzzed about female performance in Black Panther) on awards season roundtables to represent the film.November 11, 2018 at 3:29 am #1202672483
Just saw “Destroyer” and Nicole Kidman = WOW! I’ve got to make room for her in my Best Actress predictions but not sure who to remove. This fierce role would have certainly been written for a male lead in previous decades, but it’s great for them that they wrote it for Kidman.
Yeah, I just posted some other reactions from industry screenings on the Destroyer thread, and they seem to be along the line of yours.
Think people may be underestimating Kidman’s potential to be our Best Actress winner. She hasn’t got the top 5 BP contender film like Gaga or Colman, but she’s apparently got the performance (which should still count for something!) and her stature in the industry has never been higher. Still think there is a chance she surges and Training Day’s her way to gold.November 11, 2018 at 3:12 am #1202672481
Destroyer seems to be playing well among actors and industry types at SAG-AFTRA and other industry screenings, which should bode well for Kidman’s chances. Rafael Agustin, an actor and staff writer on Jane The Virgin tweeted that he thinks Destroyer will be Kidman’s Training Day (ie her likely Oscar winner). A comparison I alluded to some months back on this thread.
Writer/Director, critic and AMPAS historian Jim Hemphill called it Kidman’s greatest performance and said the film stands comparison with the best of Scorsese and Michael Mann. Said Kidman’s character was as memorable as Travis Bickle from Taxi Driver.November 5, 2018 at 4:19 pm #1202669099
It was Close. Both of them received HUGE standing ovations. And both were hugely praised for their speeches.
Thought as much (that it would be Close). Thanks for the confirmation.November 5, 2018 at 4:17 pm #1202669098
I am totally with you there but we can’t deny that the academy has some weird bias towards certain movies. “Destroyer” is a prime example of one of those movies. The movie is going to really struggle with the box office as Annapurna is not very good at scheduling its releases. And think about it: First Man, a movie that seems like it would be a hit, flopped in the box office, while Bohemian Rhapsody – the critically punned movie – is exploding. The normal moviegoer wants to have fun in the movies and Destroyer doesn’t seem like a lot of “fun.” I would go see Destroyer in a second but that’s just me.
A 64 on MC isn’t that great considering that Colman has a movie currently in the low 90s; Davis, McCarthy and Gaga have movies in the high 80s; and Close has a movie in the high 70s. Of course, there’s also Aparicio with a 95 MC score for Roma. I REALLY want to believe that Kidman will make it, but it’s not looking too good for her.
The point is the metacritic score is too incomplete to use against the movie right now, because you won’t get the majority of reviews on metacritic till it’s close to release. Rotten Tomatoes is a more accurate representation of it’s critical reception, as far more RT eligible critics have reviewed the movie than metacritic critics. It’s not rocket science. Wait until December till you start using meacritic over RT. It could easily rise to high 70’s or more, just as people expect Green Book to rise when it has more metacritic reviews. Ignoring the far more complete and certified RT score for the current meetacritic score is dishonest.
Also, Box Office does not matter for Destroyer. Historically, movies released that late don’t get judged on box office. Destroyer simply needs to be seen. Whether through industry screenings (SAG, AMPAS etc) or screeners.
Box office would be more an issue if it was released this month or even early next month. By the time Destroyer gets a wide release on Janurary 25th, we’ll be heavily into a lot of nomination processes for various awards.November 5, 2018 at 3:20 pm #1202669067
Frankly, I suspect it’s likelier she misses altogether than nails down double nominations at this point. I do think Supporting Actress is likelier – Destroyer won’t be a commercial success and critics aren’t terribly fond of the film itself.
For the finest in film reviews and awards analysis, please visit me at The Awards Connection!
Why do people keep spreading this urban myth that critics didn’t like Destroyer?
It’s pushing 90% on Rotten Tomatoes with over 50 reviews counted. It was certified fresh months before it’s actual release.Only in the land of ‘hysterical Oscar prognosticators” can a critical reception that strong be turned into, “critics thought it was shit/mediocre”. It’s either a Best Picture contender or crap. No nuance our middle ground.
It’s too grim and genre-y to be a realistic Best Pic contender, but any filmmaker on earth would be estactic and relieved with a critical reception that good.
I guess you can always turn to a highly incomplete metacritic score to justify this ridiculous claim, but even that feels like a spurious claim. It’s in the green at 64 (only a couple of points behind supposed Best Picture Frontrunner Green Book, also in the 60’s), and should almost certainly rise when more metacritic eligible critics review it (like the NY Times Manhola Dargis, who praised Destroyer after TIFF, but has yet to write an official review).
Certainly, the certified fresh score of Rotten Tomatoes should be used as the primary source (for now) to judge it’s critical reception, which is excellent.November 4, 2018 at 8:28 pm #1202668502
Hmmm…Pete Hammond of Deadline tweeted that Kidman got a “giant standing ovation” at the Hollywood Film awards, and he thinks that bodes well for double nominations.
Hammond said only one other person got a standing ovation, but didn’t specify whom. Wonder if it was Close…