Saturday, September 01, 2007

"Margot" Kidman

I really am not here. Nope. Working on stuff. But check out JJ's initial reaction to Margot at the Wedding at Telluride. 'Sensation or near miss?' Intriguing question. The Hollywood Reporter also loves it.


jamie said...

Wow, Nicole's Margot is one of the most interesting characters he's ever encountered on film?!

This is going to be fabulous.

VS said...

Is "Margot at the wedding" going to be to Kidman what "Who's Affraid of Virginia Woolf" was to Liz Taylor: a second trylly deserving Oscar to erase the image winning her Oscar not for her very best????


well... i kinda doubt it. all these reports that the characters are unlikeable could do them all in when it comes to wins --or even noms. we'll see. Oscar just isn't as hateable character friendly anymore unless you're playing a villain.

Tylerboy237 said...

And it's a rave from the Hollywood Reporter ! The critics calls Kidmand and Leigh "brilliant", "the two actresses do some of their best work here"... On the Telluride film fest official site, it is writtent that "Nicole Kidman and Jennifer Jason Leigh are each superlative as Margot and Pauline".
Jennifer Jason Leigh is in, because best supporting actress is quite weak this year.
Now the real question is Kidman. Is her character too unlikable for the Academy ? I hope not. She's getting very good ink, even by Poland at the Hot Button who says it's a strong piece of low-key acting even though he didn't like the movie.


i dunno tylerboy "low key" is the kind of adjective that makes Oscar run away, don'cha think?

Kamikaze Camel said...

Especially considering Kidman has only been nominated for performances that scream for your attention.

Anonymous said...

just saw the movie

ho hum
squid and whale was so so much better

this was trying to be funny and insightful but all the actors were so trying...except for jason leigh
she is the only amazing thing in the movie
kidman: not a near miss but a flat fall on the pavement

Anonymous said...

a comedy role has got to break through and that will either be linney in the savages or kidman in margot if the golden compass is a huge hit everyone will forget the invasion bad smell and nom her again i feel its bonham carter vs leigh for the win is supp,i think we are looking at cotillard,witherspoon,knightley & christie in lead.

Anonymous said...

The Hollywood Reporter gave it a huge rave, with gushing praise for both Kidman and Leigh.

Nicole's buzz is growing. She is a lock for a Golden Globe comedy/musical nod, and with a few more raves like the Hollywood Reporter one she should be firmly in the race.

JJL is now looking a good bet to win Best Supporting Actress because everything is in her favor: very strong early buzz, way-overdue status, the director's wife (oh don't give me that look), a weak Supporting category with no frontrunner yet - Saoirse Ronan has been raved, but some were disappointed by Romola Garai in Atonement, notably Variety. JJL will probably win a few critics' awards and be on her way. Even if she doesn't win, her nomination is locked.

Baumbach's screenplay has a great shot too. Which would mean husband-and-wife noms.

I wouldn't even rule out Jack Black for a Supporting nod.

- spooky kid


nobody is a lock yet. It's September 2nd. the festivals have just begun. nothing has opened yet to face the public. Long lead critics don't mean a thing until CONSENSUS takes hold

JJL is a good bet for the reasons you mentioned (and i've had her at #1 since the beginning ) but we're way too early for locks at the Globes or the Oscars.

GLOBE COMEDY/MUSICAL actress will be stacked with contenders as usual we already have 3 good bet contenders they'll be thinking about...

KERI RUSSELL -waitress
NIKKI BLONSKY -hairspray

and that's before the fall movies.

we've still got to get through KIDMAN
COTILLARD (probably drama but you never know)
PFEIFFER (if ICNBYW ever opens she'd be a great Globe bet to honor a comeback year and she does hold the record i believe or is tied for most consecutive Globe nods ever....)
and SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED (who the Globe Voters love as much as they love Kidman)

so I'd say there's no "locks" just yet. Though Blonsky and Heigl are very good bets no matter what happens now... which means there might be only 3 slots in play.

Anonymous said...

I really hope that the Globes place Marion Cotillard in Drama instead of Musical/Comedy, b/c even though that's the route they've taken with Jamie Foxx, Reese Witherspoon, Joaquin Phoenix, etc., Cotillard does not belong in a category with Nikki Blonsky and Katherine Heigl. It's far more dramatic and should be playing with the "big dogs". Though, she might ace a win in that category, so who knows.

I'm happy that it looks like Nicole Kidman has a winner here. Something tells me though that if the "dramedy" slot is between "The Savages" and "Margot at the Wedding", they'd go for the former. If "The Nanny Diaries" was better than what it was, then Linney could have had that Meryl "Prada" slot going for her at the Globes, but that's not going to happen now. "The Savages" looks like a good shot for her. This might be Jennifer Jason Leigh's year in supporting actress too. That's exciting -- she's deserved recognition for so long now and has gone unheralded by the Academy. I think she'll have tough competition against Helena Bonham Carter though for "Sweeney Todd", unless she ends up goes lead.

The Keeper said...

What was it David Thomson said? I'll see if I can paraphrase: Nicole Kidman hasn't had an easy career. If it were someone else, she would have given up long ago or wonder why she should even get up from her bed to go to work simply due to the reaction she gets.

Her 2 Oscar noms and the win have always seemed like flukes to me because of how uncharacteristically generous AMPAS had been, if they could sidesweep her for TDF and EWS not to mention PoaL, I never thought they'd give her the time of day.

So, I am not sure Kidman will be nomed, and it is not just AMPAS that won't nom her, the critics won't either. We know AMPAS won't nom her for any of her unsentimental roles or those that are unlikeable or subtle and critics just don't care to put her name anywhere on their lists, she is not the kind of actress they like to see making the movies she makes and giving the performances she gives. I hope her performance is divisive enough to warrant some discussion but at least with more traction on the positive side unlike Birth and Fur. It is ridiculous that her performances in Dogville, Birth, Fur were all overlooked massively all round and critically in the case of the last two, at least, Dogville got some attention. All the critics who raved her at Cannes for Dogville seemed to forget her once the award season started.

The ridiculous excuses I've been reading about the fact that she is too prolific and that this is giving her problems is ridiculous, she is an actress, 2 movies a year is par for the course, let's see our performers on the screen than in the tabloids. If she does great work then she should be commended. I've always thought that although she did great work, she'd be better working in Europe.

MATW will mark a return to the Nicole Kidman of PoaL, EWS, Dogville, Fur, Birth, etc. because after MATW comes TGC, Australia and at a time when she just clocked 40! and it will be a shame if MATW is dismissed or just receives a smattering of applause.

Hopefully, she thinks before she makes a huge mainstream movie for the studios since the relationship has never worked out because one has to wonder why she works well in their small projects, perhaps it is because the writer-director is in charge than when a "gun for hire" director is at the helm and can't say to the studios "don't touch my work".

Since The Hours and before MATW, Kidman has released/made Cold Mountain, The Human Stain, Dogville, Birth, The Stepford Wives, The Interpreter, Bewitched, Fur, The Invasion. Only 3 are outright awful and all were bIg studio fares but the way she is written about, one would think she sends out massive doses of mediocrity at every instance.

JJL will get a nom, I hope, her character is a lot warmer and more accessible to the audience (at least from the script) despite almost being like Margot. She may be another Zellwegger to Kidman, albeit, with a better performance than RZ. Another wonder that JJL has never received ONE nomination!

Only Hollywood Reporter has written a review and it was quite a rave even going as far as saying it will be noticed come award season, nothing from other major critics or Davind Poland wrote a review also and that's about it from blogs/sites. "JJ" of As Little As Possible" kinda wrote a few sentences and nothing more. His teaser yesterday was appetising but today, his blurb on MATW was mixed/lukewarm at best.

Anonymous said...

it's a shame about kidman she was the belle du jour in 01 - 04 what with cold mountain,the others,moulin rouge,dogville,birth & the hours but she always gets slated for her studio films,maybe she should pic her studio films better i mean the stepford wives as a comedy and bewitched as movie in a movie who thought that up,the invasion looked promising but something went wrong they made it unscary and bad press is bad press.
they seem to be over her now and i think it's going to take something really special for them to embrace her agian she needs to be in a best pic nominee to get it i feel,matw is not it.
i agree she is o prolific i mean did she have to amke the human stain was the film good the character likeable no!!! and anthony hopkins is doing parody like no other,fur,dogville & birth were all good perfs but not the type ebart will go ga ga over and help during awards season and not oscar friendly,i say they'll make her wait till australia next year when she will be nommed and not win because kate w or meryl will.

The Keeper said...

anonymous 1.30, the question we should ask is if Kidman is interested in playing likeable or sentimental characters? it seems that she doesn't care for those characters since she goes for the opposite most often than not. Her filmography is filled with these kind of characters who are not endearing, in that case, I don't think she cares to be liked.

What AMPAS considers to be special is never special when it comes to Kidman. The Hours and her performance in it pale in comparison to her work in Birth, Dogville or Fur, and I am sure it will pale in comparison to MATW. She has given performances that are a lot more special than what they applauded her for. I doubt "Australia" will come close to the little we've heard about her in MATW, it might be an epic but the story is hardly original and I doubt the performance will be anything earth-shattering so you may be right that they will be looking to that.

Anonymous said...

Jennifer Jason Leigh may not be a lock yet, but I'm betting that after Toronto and New York Film Festivals she will be considered the female Javier Bardem, i.e. as close to a lock as one can realistically get this early in the season. Even if she slips down a few notches because of disappointing box-office or mixed reviews for the film, I definitely can't see her falling out of the top 5. Margot is being heavily predicted for another Original Screenplay nomination for Baumbach - that is a relatively easy category for an indie dramedy like Margot to get into, and I really can't see them giving Baumbach a second nomination while snubbing his wife yet again (and you know how AMPAS loves it some husband-and-wife action).

The reason I have more faith in Margot than The Savages for this year's little indie dramedy crossover slot is primarily to do with The Savages not being released until 26 December, which is now considered very late for even big-budget studio Oscarbait in this shorter season, let alone a domestic dramedy.

- spooky kid

Kamikaze Camel said...

It'll be annoying if Cotillard gets submitted to Musical/Comedy because she didn't even sing, she just lipsynced. It's, essentially, a drama with a Edith Piaf soundtrack.

amir_uk said...

It'll be annoying if Cotillard gets nominated in what is turning out to be a great year for Actress (and still with SO many to come).

If she gets nommed it'll be the worst performance to get into that category since the car crashes of 2003 (Castle-Hughes! Keaton! Morton! Watts! over Curtis, Johansson, Kidman, Paltrow... - what were they thinking?) Academy, please don't make me ask that of you this year.

Anonymous said...

Marion Cotillard is getting in, so you'd better get used to it.

Nicole Kidman could make the cut too, with some critics' support and Golden Globe attention.

Jennifer Jason Leigh is the safest Supporting bet by a good stretch. Saoirse Ronan and Cate Blanchett look solid too; it looks like Romola Garai is on her way out; Susan Sarandon will have to overcome a weak film, thankless role and VERY little screen-time; and Helena Bonham Carter could totally go either way at this point, everything riding on how Sweeney Todd is received - it will probably be a very polarizing, very Burton-esque film and I still can't see it going over well with AMPAS.

amir_uk said...

I've got used to it, but thanks for your concern.

What do people see in Cotiallrd's performance though? Please someone, just one, enlighten me. All I saw was some lip-synching, some histrionics and pretty much the same mannerisms/histrionics repeated over and over again. No character arc whatsoever (although the editor is as much to blame).

Out of the actresses so far, Christie and Knightley should definitely be nominated. Heigl was also lovely in a perfect-for-the-Globes turn.

amir_uk said...

Also with the Supporting Actresses, can someone start the campaign for Vanesa Redgrave please. She was ASTONISHING in her 8 minutes (I counted the 2nd time I saw the film) in Atonement. Ronan was also excellent so I wouldn't begrudge her a nom, but Redgrave - pure wow.

If Judi Dench, Beatrice Straight and Anthony Quinn could WIN for their 8 minute performances, and countless others can be nomintated, room should definitely be made for Redgrave this year (who is better than the aforementioned).

Kamikaze Camel said...

Cotillard's performance confused me. Why was she making so many silly faces?

Anonymous said...

agree about 03,keaton ahhhhh,hughes aaahhhhhhh,watss one long scream,morton good but a support perf.
shoulda been


ugh -connelly was so dull in House of Sand and Fog. but i think this is why 2003 was so strange. A lot of women in play and nobody agreed at all (apart from Theron, a major consensus)

glenn -agreed on cotillard? I was like "what? why?" half the time. Maybe Piaf pulled faces constantly and inexplicably --probably did the way actors research and mimic these other famous person roles --but repeating that for film might not have been the best route. a performance needs to be fashioned, too.