|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 18, 2024 13:12:53 GMT
All i'm saying is that she could win next season between Babygirl and Holland Michigan. If some Emma Stone can win two Oscars, why can't she??? It doesn't work like that. That's like saying if Hillary Swank can win two Oscars, then so can Kate Winslet ( who like Kidman, has 1) . Or if Renee Zellweger can have 2 Oscars, Glenn Close should have 3 (instead of none). Particularly for actresses, winning multiple Oscars can be more about timing than stature or reputation. Swank and Zellweger and Sally Field aren't generally regarded as the best actresses of their generation, but each have two Oscars over much better regarded actresses who have 1 or none. Zellweger won a 2nd Oscar a few years ago due to timing and the right role and her career went right back to where it was before. Kidman is not in competition with Stone, who is over 20 years her junior ( and Kidman is actually one of Stone's idols). Let Margot Robbie and Sairose Ronan worry about Stone. I don't think it matters at this stage of her career if Kidman wins another Oscar or not. She's established herself as one of the all-time greats. 2 Oscars will not help Zellweger, Swank or even Sally Field get the AFI Lifetime Achievement Award. None of them are at that level, reputation wise. I don't think you can really start talking about another Oscar for Holland ,Michigan or Babygirl till the films get some sort of release and reception ( whether through the festival circuit or otherwise). Kidman isn't working with the directors on these films because they are Oscar favorites (they aren't...they are just promising filmmakers). She's working with Halina Rejin and Mimi Cave became she promised to support female filmmakers, and unlike a lot of people who talk a good game, but do nothing, Kidman has put her money where her mouth is and kept her promise. She has probably directly given jobs or helped get projects greenlit for more female directors than probably any star in the industry over the last 7 years. What she's done is HUGE and kind of selfless. She doesn't just chase all the established male Oscar friendly auteurs like many of her peers. She's trying to change the directing statistics for women in the industry almost single handedly, and using her clout to do it.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 18, 2024 13:24:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 18, 2024 16:50:42 GMT
The above is why I say Kidman for me easily has the best career in Hollywood for any actress in or near her age group ( and that includes Cate Blanchett, Julianne Moore, Kate Winslet etc). Because Kidman can literally do anything she wants, and it's evident in how she chooses to use the power she has. Her production company is that big, successful and efficient. If Kidman wanted to spend all her time developing projects just to take to all the big male auteurs ( Haynes, Almodovar etc) to try and get another Oscar, she really could. And maybe she would have if she were younger. But she develops projects to prioritise giving to female directors. Not that she still doesn't develop stuff for male auteurs ( like Justin Kurzel for Mice). But she literally laid down a mission statement 7 years ago to personally change statistics for women directors, and has followed it through, and exceeded it wildly. She isn't just interested in chasing Oscars. She wouldn't do what she's doing if she prioritised that. Also makes you wonder....how many potential roles/opportunities with notable male auteurs has she had to turn down in the last 7 years, because she's committed to keeping her promise to work with more female directors consistently. TylerDeneuve ....what are your thoughts about what Kidman has done to advance the cause of female directors? Perhaps even at a cost to any personal ambition.
|
|
|
Post by TylerDeneuve on Mar 18, 2024 22:21:15 GMT
....what are your thoughts about what Kidman has done to advance the cause of female directors? Perhaps even at a cost to any personal ambition. I think it's awesome! Just one more reason to love her. But I also think there's room at the top for Kidman, Moore, Blanchett, and Winslet. I love that all of them are thriving at this point in their careers.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 18, 2024 23:20:55 GMT
....what are your thoughts about what Kidman has done to advance the cause of female directors? Perhaps even at a cost to any personal ambition. I think it's awesome! Just one more reason to love her. But I also think there's room at the top for Kidman, Moore, Blanchett, and Winslet. I love that all of them are thriving at this point in their careers. Of course there's room for all of them to thrive . It's just refuting the point sometimes made here anytime some actress around or near Kidman's age group gets cast by some big-time male auteur, that she must be raging with envy . Reading her own statements and looking at her own actions when it comes to making sure working with and championing female directors has become her absolute priority in the last 7 years, shows how ridiculous that claim sounds. If Kidman wanted to be in that rat race ( running after all the big ticket male auteurs to try snag an Oscar), and committed to it, she'd probably win that rat race based on her power in the industry. She's not really given enough credit for how principled she is. Like I said, she must have turned down a fair amount of notable male auteurs in the last few years to keep up her pledge to female directors. What she's done is an absolute boss move.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 19, 2024 19:40:23 GMT
It's crazy how she's been keeping up this female director pledge for so many years. That's why Susanne Bier got The Undoing, as Kidman explains here.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Mar 19, 2024 23:35:11 GMT
I think it's admirable in some ways, but I remain dubious as to the extent of change being enacted. Did Dee Rees gain anything from that Hathaway/Affleck movie she did? I'm sure everyone had solid intentions, but it just came and went and she appears to be in movie director jail. I don't think DiCaprio joining Teyana Taylor's directorial debut would be of much benefit to female or black directors unless the film was shockingly good. If it's bad/mid/average, he looks like he's lost his fastball and the aura of his involvement in things begins to dissipate (particularly if he starts making a habit of it), while for the director it just looks to the industry like a reason to take so-and-so even less seriously, like "You had the participation of _____ and the thing still flopped, has a 50 on MC, etc.?"
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 19, 2024 23:41:27 GMT
I think it's admirable in some ways, but I remain dubious as to the extent of change being enacted. Did Dee Rees gain anything from that Hathaway/Affleck movie she did? I'm sure everyone had solid intentions, but it just came and went and she appears to be in movie director jail. I don't think DiCaprio joining Teyana Taylor's directorial debut would be of much benefit to female or black directors unless the film was shockingly good. If it's bad/mid/average, he looks like he's lost his fastball and the aura of his involvement in things begins to dissipate (particularly if he starts making a habit of it), while for the director it just looks to the industry like a reason to take so-and-so even less seriously, like "You had the participation of _____ and the thing still flopped, has a 50 on MC, etc.?" The thing is that DiCaprio starring in an unknown quantity of a director would be the hugest endorsement of that director that anyone could ask for. Even if the film doesn't meet expectations, the fact that they were able to bag the most bankable movie star on the planet would be an unbelievable coup, and it's not like Teyana Taylor would be getting the sort of budget that would risk it being a box office bomb. Regardless of one's feelings on DiCaprio as an actor, he is a reliable box office draw, and he (along with Cruise) should by rights be working in indie projects here and there because their mere presence will likely guarantee the film does well at the box office, and it's a great way to shed some profile on up-and-coming filmmakers rather than working with the same creative partnerships over and over. It's using their powers for good, for lack of a better word. As for Dee Rees, we can't ignore the real consequences that being a woman and a minority in Hollywood bring about. If you aren't an undeniable success at the box office and with the critics, it's real easily to get sidelined or shunted to the wayside, whereas straight white male filmmakers are given more chances.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Mar 19, 2024 23:51:01 GMT
I think it's admirable in some ways, but I remain dubious as to the extent of change being enacted. Did Dee Rees gain anything from that Hathaway/Affleck movie she did? I'm sure everyone had solid intentions, but it just came and went and she appears to be in movie director jail. I don't think DiCaprio joining Teyana Taylor's directorial debut would be of much benefit to female or black directors unless the film was shockingly good. If it's bad/mid/average, he looks like he's lost his fastball and the aura of his involvement in things begins to dissipate (particularly if he starts making a habit of it), while for the director it just looks to the industry like a reason to take so-and-so even less seriously, like "You had the participation of _____ and the thing still flopped, has a 50 on MC, etc.?" The thing is that DiCaprio starring in an unknown quantity of a director would be the hugest endorsement of that director that anyone could ask for. Even if the film doesn't meet expectations, the fact that they were able to bag the most bankable movie star on the planet would be an unbelievable coup, and it's not like Teyana Taylor would be getting the sort of budget that would risk it being a box office bomb. Regardless of one's feelings on DiCaprio as an actor, he is a reliable box office draw, and he (along with Cruise) should by rights be working in indie projects here and there because their mere presence will likely guarantee the film does well at the box office, and it's a great way to shed some profile on up-and-coming filmmakers rather than working with the same creative partnerships over and over. It's using their powers for good, for lack of a better word. As for Dee Rees, we can't ignore the real consequences that being a woman and a minority in Hollywood bring about. If you aren't an undeniable success at the box office and with the critics, it's real easily to get sidelined or shunted to the wayside, whereas straight white male filmmakers are given more chances. But only because there is the impression, whether one likes him or not, that he's always carefully weighing scripts and examining directors' previous work, etc. That just completely goes away if he's like "Fuck it. Tarantino just offered me this last script of his, which is quite good, and Scorsese wants to do The Wager, and Fincher/Spielberg/Inarritu all have these scripts I like, but I'm going to do this other thing I'm much less confident in."
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 20, 2024 0:04:34 GMT
The thing is that DiCaprio starring in an unknown quantity of a director would be the hugest endorsement of that director that anyone could ask for. Even if the film doesn't meet expectations, the fact that they were able to bag the most bankable movie star on the planet would be an unbelievable coup, and it's not like Teyana Taylor would be getting the sort of budget that would risk it being a box office bomb. Regardless of one's feelings on DiCaprio as an actor, he is a reliable box office draw, and he (along with Cruise) should by rights be working in indie projects here and there because their mere presence will likely guarantee the film does well at the box office, and it's a great way to shed some profile on up-and-coming filmmakers rather than working with the same creative partnerships over and over. It's using their powers for good, for lack of a better word. As for Dee Rees, we can't ignore the real consequences that being a woman and a minority in Hollywood bring about. If you aren't an undeniable success at the box office and with the critics, it's real easily to get sidelined or shunted to the wayside, whereas straight white male filmmakers are given more chances. But only because there is the impression, whether one likes him or not, that he's always carefully weighing scripts and examining directors' previous work, etc. That just completely goes away if he's like "Fuck it. Tarantino just offered me this last script of his, which is quite good, and Scorsese wants to do The Wager, and Fincher/Spielberg/Inarritu all have these scripts I like, but I'm going to do this other thing I'm much less confident in." But it's not like he'd be giving up working with Tarantino or Scorsese, both of whom take their time in creating their projects, to hop on a 25-day shoot with an indie filmmaker, especially as they would likely be bending over backwards to accommodate DiCaprio. When you're the golden goose, you get to call the shots and any journeyman director (and the studio) will likely accept the terms because they know the reward outweighs the risk in the end. DiCaprio only wants to film on Sunday evenings? Sure, fine, fuck it. Your shoot runs longer but your movie is still going to likely make bank on the back end. He's one of the only actors who can guarantee a return on a studio's investment, and if he decided to work for points on the package instead of a $30 million payday up front, it would help the film itself because that money could go towards the production itself. This is one of my big issues with guys like DiCaprio and Cruise. They're not taking the risks that I think would help the overall film industry. Yes, they are "event" actors, but if the quality of their project selection holds up and they get first dibs on any scripts in Hollywood or could net any director they wanted, then the risk of them diluting that brand is low because it's not like Scorsese, Tarantino, Spielberg, AGI, Fincher et al. are the only ones with access to good screenplays. They are just the ones given more opportunities by Hollywood. Is there a reason Cruise couldn't fit a $20 million film in between Mission: Impossible releases? As far as Kidman goes, even if I feel like her swings don't always land, I think she has an admirable tack in trying to work with different auteurs and different cinematic voices to give her a challenge. It should be something all actors aspire to, because it's so easy to get stuck in a rut working with the same people over and over. You get comfortable, you get complacent, which breeds laziness and a reluctance to speak up if something's not working.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 20, 2024 3:31:55 GMT
I think it's admirable in some ways, but I remain dubious as to the extent of change being enacted. Did Dee Rees gain anything from that Hathaway/Affleck movie she did? I'm sure everyone had solid intentions, but it just came and went and she appears to be in movie director jail. I don't think DiCaprio joining Teyana Taylor's directorial debut would be of much benefit to female or black directors unless the film was shockingly good. If it's bad/mid/average, he looks like he's lost his fastball and the aura of his involvement in things begins to dissipate (particularly if he starts making a habit of it), while for the director it just looks to the industry like a reason to take so-and-so even less seriously, like "You had the participation of _____ and the thing still flopped, has a 50 on MC, etc.?" I think what Kidman's done with her pledge has enacted significant change and opportunities for female directors in the industry ( and encouraged younger stars like Margot Robbie, who idolises Kidman, to follow in her example and normalise using their power to get female directors up the food chain). Robbie produces as well, and in the wake of Kidman making her pledge, has gone out of her way to give opportunities to female directors. Cathy Yan for Birds Of Prey. Greta Gerwig with Barbie (Robbie gave Gerwig the job) . And while she didn't star in them, she has produced both Emerald Fennell's feature films, Promising Young Woman and Saltburn. I don't believe Robbie would be using her power this way, if Kidman didn't set the example for her. And Robbie has said she takes advice from Kidman and considers her a mentor. I don't think it's a coincidence that Robbie started using her clout to give female directors more opportunities after Kidman said it was neccesary. Kidman is an elder stateswoman at this point....when she says and does something, people listen and follow suit. Even with Kidman herself.... Lulu Wang hadn't directed anything longform since The Farewell in 2019 before Kidman got her to do Expats. The movie was a low budget hit (cost 3 million dollars to make) that quadrupled it's budget and was nominated/won a lot of big awards. But as an Asian woman, the industry still wasn't throwing major projects her way, with the ease that they might with a male director who had an indie breakthrough like that. It takes a star/producer like Kidman to show complete confidence in Wang, and be able to go to Amazon, and say I want you to give Lulu Wang 100 million dollars and complete creative control so she can shoot a lush, six part series about rich Expats on location in Hong Kong. With great reviews for Expats and it being the no.1 show on Amazon Worldwide while it was airing, Kidman has taken Wang from a low budget indie director to an auteur now proven to be able to direct large scale big budget projects that are critically successful and have an audience. Kidman will have basically transformed Wang's career with this opportunity, and she will get big opportunities going forward. DiCaprio needs to do whatever he feels is best for himself and his career. Not everyone is built to risk their privilege and power for the benefit of others, and that's okay. It's not for me to judge how he uses his power to help others in his industry. He's not a woman, so he doesn't see it as his fight. But it is for women like Kidman and Robbie, and it makes a huge difference to female directors that they have stars of their level going to bat for them ( when the easier option is to always go for a more established male director), particularly in a male dominated profession.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Mar 20, 2024 4:16:50 GMT
Wouldn't it make more sense to become a box-office juggernaut, and then kind of massage promising projects by talented but fledgling directors into being bonafide sensations? Let's take Destroyer. Does that film have more of a profile in any way than Jennifer's Body or The Invitation? Nolan's appreciation for it is interesting, I'll give you.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 20, 2024 4:37:24 GMT
Wouldn't it make more sense to become a box-office juggernaut, and then kind of massage promising projects by talented but fledgling directors into being bonafide sensations? Let's take Destroyer. Does that film have more of a profile in any way than Jennifer's Body or The Invitation? Nolan's appreciation for it is interesting, I'll give you. The fact that Empire Magazine, the UK's biggest film magazine, just named Destroyer this month as Kidman's 2nd Best Film in their top 10 of her filmography is huge for the potential enduring life of that film. Especially when you consider how major and impressive Kidman's filmography is and all the great auteurs she's worked with. It took 10-15 years for Birth ( a critical and box office failure on release) to gain widespread consensus by cinephiles as being one of her most significant works . Along with the Nolan co-sign, that Empire endorsement shows that Destroyer has the potential to be widely seen as one of the most important films in Kidman's oveure. We may need to wait another decade to see where it's reputation goes. These things take time. The crucial thing with Kidman is that she isn't giving these female directors opportunities just because they are women. Kidman knows how to identify talent. She'll have watched the films these women directed before, whether it's their short films, low budget feature films or TV work. And she'll know their potential to deliver if she works with them. That's why most of her collaborations with female directors have proven to be successful critically or commercially ( and sometimes both). She'll only work with women whom she's confident can do it at a high level, but knows the industry aren't running to give them opportunities to do just that
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 20, 2024 15:29:05 GMT
Kidman has just been nominated for a BAFTA, this time as a producer through her production company Blossom Films, which produced Love & Death ( starring Elizabeth Olsen). The show is nominated in the International Programme category at the television BAFTA's alongside Beef, Succession, The Last Of Us, Class Act and The Bear.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 22, 2024 17:09:25 GMT
People in the industry are taking note of Kidman's pledge to female directors and how she's followed through. This from Disney's head of animation effects:
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 23, 2024 3:18:05 GMT
Seems the origins of Kidman's pledge came from a dinner she had with Meryl Streep and Cate Blanchett, where they all discussed how awful the statistics were for female crew and directors. She decided to do the pledge publicly after that dinner. Kidman talks about it in a conversation with Amy Adams.
And this was most likely the dinner in question.
After that dinner, Kidman and Streep also started financially supporting a Writers Lab to help women screenwriters in the industry:
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 28, 2024 14:02:08 GMT
Our greatest living actress and Queen Of Prestige Television wins The Gracie Award for Best Actress In A Supporting Role for Special Ops: Lioness.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 30, 2024 20:10:36 GMT
Amazing to see all those credits. What an incredible body of work. 1 month till the AFI ceremony.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Apr 1, 2024 23:32:22 GMT
Great scenes....Besties Nicole Kidman & Naomi Watts out in London showing support for fellow Aussie actress Sarah Snook in her acclaimed play The Picture Of Dorian Gray. Australians understand solidrarity, because I feel like Kidman and Watts went to London specifically to watch Snook.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Apr 7, 2024 15:58:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Apr 26, 2024 7:48:03 GMT
There have been some brilliant articles this week about Nicole Kidman in anticipation of her AFI Lifetime Achievement Award Gala this weekend. Lots of her directors looking back at her films and articulating what makes her so great.
|
|