|
Post by bob-coppola on Jul 17, 2019 21:13:26 GMT
I love both, but it comes as no surprise that I prefer Kidman by a mile. Their strenghts are quite different, and I prefer Kidman's: I think it's more interesting and more challenging.
Of course, she's done/does her share of Hollywood tentpoles and Oscar baits, but her character-based and director-driven more introspective, somber work is magnificent. She takes these very weird movies, and these complicated, unlikable, serious characters and make it work. Big Little Lies is a perfect example of this: it feels like a very accurate, grounded and human depiction of what's like to come out of an abusive relationship, not a prime TV, Hollywood version of that experience. So many of her performances are glamour-free in a way that makes it seem hauntingly real.
To be fair, thought, there's one thing Winslet does that is quite better than Kidman: she's much funnier. Kidman is very, very serious and lacks the neurotic, energetic quality that makes Winslet more fun and funnier. Even though my favorite Winslet performance is the more dramatic Revolutionary Road, I think she's overall better in more light-toned, humorous dramas such as Heavenly Creatures and Sense and Sensibility. Her turn in Carnage is the proof of that: she had me with tears in my eyes with how funny she can be. Kidman is quite funny in To Die For (one of her best performances) and Moulin Rouge, but I can't picture her in a full-on comedy or light-hearted drama the same way I do with Winslet.
Also, I think we're being too hard on Winslet's career right now. Sure, she hasn't had Kidman's 2017 or even her Big Little Lies moment, but even though her filmography as of lately seems lackluster, it also seems more like a bad moment than her career going downhill or something. It's not like she's Naomi Watts who needs to fire her agent right now. Ammonite and Blackbird should be a very deserved comeback, and she was honestly great in Wonder Wheel. I really like that movie and Winslet makes my Top 10 Best Actress list that year.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 17, 2019 22:14:38 GMT
To be fair, thought, there's one thing Winslet does that is quite better than Kidman: she's much funnier. Kidman is very, very serious and lacks the neurotic, energetic quality that makes Winslet more fun and funnier. Even though my favorite Winslet performance is the more dramatic Revolutionary Road, I think she's overall better in more light-toned, humorous dramas such as Heavenly Creatures and Sense and Sensibility. Her turn in Carnage is the proof of that: she had me with tears in my eyes with how funny she can be. Kidman is quite funny in To Die For (one of her best performances) and Moulin Rouge, but I can't picture her in a full-on comedy or light-hearted drama the same way I do with Winslet. I actually disagree with this. I think Kidman is flat-out great at out and out comedy. You don't actually have to couch it in terms of "black comedy" or "she was sorta funny in that musical once". Practical Magic is actually one of her most fondly remembered films and roles with popcorn audiences and many women (not neccesarily with cinephiles or critics though). She had a supporting role in a Adam Sandler/ Jennifer Aniston comedy Just Go With It, and for my money she damn near stole the movie, from two of the strongest comic actors in the business. Bewitched get an awful rap (some of it deserved. the script was not good), but Kidman really was the best thing in it, and again, outperformed a great comic actor in Will Ferrell, and did her best to overcome weak material. I don't think she's actually had a great/ respected comic vehicle that out and out fully exploits her very real strength at comedy, so her chops in that regard get underrated (even though she can steal comic scenes from the likes of Sandler and Aniston). Some of her strongest a nd lightest comic work has come in pretty disrespected films. But if someone ever writes her a potentially acclaimed mainstream comic vehicle like The Devil Wears Prada , I feel she's actually going to tear that shit to pieces.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 17, 2019 23:57:14 GMT
Neither is particularly great at comedy but Kidman has one total black comic triumph and Winslet has a looser side in general to her that Kidman could maybe use a bit more of. Winslet is riotously funny in Carnage and of course that has to be very precise and specific - she's far better in that than you'd think she'd be and far less uptight too - it's really great.
Comedy is one obvious thing that that puts these actors behind the 2 GOATS that they "seemingly" want to emulate - Streep and Huppert. By this age - or Kidman's age at least, Streep and Huppert had pulled off multiple successful and wildly diverse comedies far more and so their tool kit looked deeper if you took a snapshot.
There's time for that too though.....
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 18, 2019 4:13:11 GMT
Forgot to post this dance-off scene from Just Go With It between Kidman and Aniston in my previous post, so I'll do it now. In terms of reactions and physical comedy, she actually gives Aniston a bit of a lesson here. It's fun to see how much Kidman commits to the ridiculousness it, and for my money she does indeed give the film's funniest performance (I think a lot of critics at the time suggested she was the best thing in the movie as well). I know Adam Sandler comedies aren't everyone's cup of tea, but wish more people on places like this had seen this flick. But any one who has actually watched this film can't really question her as a great comic actress in full on comedy(better and more imaginative than Winslet, who does have a facility that can work for lighter fare)
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 18, 2019 4:53:44 GMT
Yikes...how could we forget Kidman's comic triumph in a mainstream family comedy Paddington as a taxidermist out to stuff the bear for good! Kidman gives great hammy comic antagonist in a critically praised film and performance. She does have a respected mainstream comic vehicle after all (though she shares it with a stuffed bear). Kidman literally makes too many movies ...that even I as a major supporter of her work can forget just how much she's crushed it in pretty much every genre going. It's overwhelming. Even more so than Streep (who I can't really see as a full blown action star, a la Kidman in Aquaman, though Streep gave it a half-hearted attempt in The River Wild). But again, it shows how good she is. She's an incredible comic actress, but it's like a tool in her arsenal that she uses sparingly. Anyway, very short scene from Paddington, but her line reading and timing is impeccable
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 18, 2019 10:59:19 GMT
What a marvelous thread! This is one of the few poll threads that has really looked at these closely matched actors instead of people just voting for who they like better.
Here's one with that loose/controlled quality of Winslet's in comedy - look how she's simultaneous funny and yet not - in a way a real person is in comic moment - she can be quirky and oddly funny but here where she isn't playing comedy but giving a comic performance SCENE within another performance she's giving without pushing it, it's natural/believable.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Jul 18, 2019 11:06:27 GMT
Winslet. She's much more consistent in giving good performances for me. I have grown on Kidman lately, because her performances in Rabbit Hole and Lion were truly great, but much of her early work doesn't impress me at all.
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on Jul 19, 2019 6:58:32 GMT
I’ve always preferred Kidman. Winslet is beginning to remind me of Streep in the way she’s typically a bit too mannered or theatrical for my taste these days. And I agree, her American accents drive me crazy. I could barely get through Wonder Wheel because it was so distracting.
I’m curious to see if she can get her career back on track. Her stock has definitely fallen, but so had Kidman’s in her 40’s. I can count on one hand the amount of noteworthy performances or projects she was involved in between 2007-2015. I don’t know if a similar renaissance is in the cards for Winslet, but she’s currently at an age that can be a pretty tough career transitional period for many women... A point where it’s not at all uncommon to see a career slow down and to enjoy a comeback of sorts years or decades later.
But yep, Kidman is easily the more versatile and natural talent to me and the way she turned her career around is truly amazing. I think she could be in the award conversation this year (she’s the supporting MVP of Fair and Balanced to me) and is certainly getting nominated again for Big Little Lies.
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on Jul 19, 2019 7:04:58 GMT
I also think her Oscar run compared to the likes of Blanchett and Winslet can easily be explained by the fact that she’s a much more daring performer and took on way more roles (and films) that were tough sells to the Academy.
I’m a little less sure on why she’s so low on prestigious critic awards and nominations compared to them, though. The fact that she’s never won or even been nominated for 2/3 remains a mystery to me.
|
|
Allenism
Badass
Posts: 1,445
Likes: 974
Member is Online
|
Post by Allenism on Jul 20, 2019 0:40:44 GMT
Glad to see people finally coming around on this.
It was, is, and always will be Kidman. Winslet's prime is long behind her whereas Kidman is continuing to reach new heights.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 0:43:10 GMT
Glad to see people finally coming around on this. It was, is, and always will be Kidman. Winslet's prime is long behind her whereas Kidman is continuing to reach new heights. Do you think Kidman is the MVP of "Big Little Lies"?
|
|
Allenism
Badass
Posts: 1,445
Likes: 974
Member is Online
|
Post by Allenism on Jul 20, 2019 0:54:33 GMT
Glad to see people finally coming around on this. It was, is, and always will be Kidman. Winslet's prime is long behind her whereas Kidman is continuing to reach new heights. Do you think Kidman is the MVP of "Big Little Lies"? I'm only on ep 4 of the second season but so far I'd have to say yes.
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on Jul 20, 2019 13:58:40 GMT
Winslet's career has slowed down because she got some bad projects but she hasn't fallen behind anyone really and did great work in bad projects that's the key to how you know she'll be fine - she has more Oscar nods than anyone - as much hardware as anyone (except Blanchett who like Kidman is way older), more nominations than anyone in her age group or not - tied with Blanchett (in some cases 3X as many as her age peers, 4X as many BA as Adams who is close to her overall). 3 more nominations than Foster had etc. Judi Dench character roles await her I'm quite sure.........careers are like that they go up and they go down ..........we'll see how it plays out - that's part of the fun. I feel like there’s definitely some recently bias going on here. Talking about Winslet’s slump as if Kidman didn’t have one (arguably even worse imo) is pretty hilarious. I mean, we’re talking multiple VOD films (including one with Nicolas Cage), playing second banana in junkie Adam Sandler/Jennifer Aniston films... Between that and all the hoopla about her surgeries, I can hardly think of many other actresses who had a more rough transition into maturity/middle age as a performer. Wislet had mad far less questionable choices on paper despite the fact that not much has hit and she very nearly won a second Oscar for a film that underperformed at the Oscars, winning both Globe and BAFTA in a tight two horse race, so I do think she still commands respect within the industry and Academy and will probably see an upswing soon. I just don’t think it will be on par with Kidman’s because she’s not as good an actress imo.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 20, 2019 14:31:09 GMT
Winslet's career has slowed down because she got some bad projects but she hasn't fallen behind anyone really and did great work in bad projects that's the key to how you know she'll be fine - she has more Oscar nods than anyone - as much hardware as anyone (except Blanchett who like Kidman is way older), more nominations than anyone in her age group or not - tied with Blanchett (in some cases 3X as many as her age peers, 4X as many BA as Adams who is close to her overall). 3 more nominations than Foster had etc. Judi Dench character roles await her I'm quite sure.........careers are like that they go up and they go down ..........we'll see how it plays out - that's part of the fun. I feel like there’s definitely some recently bias going on here. Talking about Winslet’s slump as if Kidman didn’t have one (arguably even worse imo) is pretty hilarious. I mean, we’re talking VOD films with Nicolas Cage, playing second banana in junkie Adam Sandler/Jennifer Aniston films... Between that and all the hoopla about her surgeries, I can hardly think of many other actresses who had a more rough transition into middle age as a performer. Wislet had mad far less questionable choices on paper despite the fact that not much has hit and she very nearly won a second Oscar for a film that underperformed at the Oscars, winning both Globe and BAFTA in a tight two horse race, so I do think she still commands respect within the industry and Academy and will probably see an upswing soon. I just don’t think it will be on par with Kidman’s because she’s not as good an actress imo. Yeah and I think sort of that's what having a career is and it's a good thing too - failure is good, you grow from it - these are two risk taking actresses so it's not going to be awards and accolades all the time either.
It's not even going to be clear for them imo opinion where they "rank" when they are eventually done - I don't hold Kidman in the esteem that some do here - I don't think she's GOAT level - she's great sometimes imo and I do rank her below Winslet and Blanchett for talent. But it's quite close as I mentioned earlier and it will be great to see where they all shake out at the end of their careers.
Like I said Kidman/Winslet/Blanchett seem to me to strive for Streep and Huppert and there's a whole group of younger paradigm shifting actress, striving to be Streep/Huppert imo too but actually not striving to be any of them that I can see at least - not yet, not overtly - Ronan, Williams and Adèle Haenel (my pick as the single best young actress in the world).
The actress classes as a whole are fascinating to discuss - at every age break.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 20, 2019 14:35:52 GMT
Kidman went through an extended period of personal and professional unpopularity that would have destroyed 99% of careers, and came out the end of it reborn and stronger. It was unusual to say the least, and recalled the fall of Marlon Brando's image and career in the 1960's (despite doing some good work in his "slump" like Kidman) and his return to the career highs in the 1970's.
Kidman was in part sustained during her period of unpopularity by her peers. While fans moved on to other actresses and critics were writing snarky pieces about whether her forehead could move, her fellow actors were giving her SAG nominations almost every other year for projects critics despised or fans could care less about (The Paperboy, Grace Of Monaco, Hemingway And Gellhorn). It was a quite remarkable run that kept Kidman viable as a "prestige" actress, despite the fact that her career obituary was being written with almost every failed project up until Lion.
Winslet's circumstances are very different. She's not a tabloid target of hate campaigns like Kidman was. She's not as disliked as Kidman was during those years, where so-called critics were trying to consign her career to the dustbin of history. That's why, imho, Winslet's mid career malaise is more worrying for her. Kidman got out of her situation because she's comfortably the finest actress of her generation, a first ballot GOAT contender and one of the most imaginative of actors. She takes big risks, and sometimes they fail, but when they pay-off, they pay-off spectacularly (and have got back into the position she is in) . Winslet doesn't generally take big risks.
It's more that Winslet's run out of tricks and surprises as an actress (Kidman never did), doesnt have that imagination and her taste in material is revealing itself to be quite basic. Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind feels a very long time ago now. The type of Oscarbait that served her so well in the 90's and 2000's feels a bit dated now. Her taste in commercial fare is also pretty uninspiring. She could do with searching out more adventurous directors....the type that might not get her Oscar attention, but might push her in newer, much needed directions as an actress. Because she doesn't seem to be moving forward as a performer. Hence the Jodie Foster comparison. It's more of a slow burnout, than a dramatic career death.
Not saying she can't get out of it. She could start working with younger, interesting directors and they could unlock new sides to her. But I don't know if she has the willingness to go there, or she'll just stick to her diet of staid Greer Garson-esque Oscarbait, and rely on them to stick the landing.
|
|
|
Post by iheartamyadams on Jul 20, 2019 16:45:26 GMT
Kidman went through an extended period of personal and professional unpopularity that would have destroyed 99% of careers, and came out the end of it reborn and stronger. It was unusual to say the least, and recalled the fall of Marlon Brando's image and career in the 1960's (despite doing some good work in his "slump" like Kidman) and his return to the career highs in the 1970's. Kidman was in part sustained during her period of unpopularity by her peers. While fans moved on to other actresses and critics were writing snarky pieces about whether her forehead could move, her fellow actors were giving her SAG nominations almost every other year for projects critics despised or fans could care less about (The Paperboy, Grace Of Monaco, Hemingway And Gellhorn). It was a quite remarkable run that kept Kidman viable as a "prestige" actress, despite the fact that her career obituary was being written with almost every failed project up until Lion.Winslet's circumstances are very different. She's not a tabloid target of hate campaigns like Kidman was. She's not as disliked as Kidman was during those years, where so-called critics were trying to consign her career to the dustbin of history. That's why, imho, Winslet's mid career malaise is more worrying for her. Kidman got out of her situation because she's comfortably the finest actress of her generation, a first ballot GOAT contender and one of the most imaginative of actors. She takes big risks, and sometimes they fail, but when they pay-off, they pay-off spectacularly (and have got back into the position she is in) . Winslet doesn't generally take big risks. It's more that Winslet's run out of tricks and surprises as an actress (Kidman never did), doesnt have that imagination and her taste in material is revealing itself to be quite basic. Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind feels a very long time ago now. The type of Oscarbait that served her so well in the 90's and 2000's feels a bit dated now. Her taste in commercial fare is also pretty uninspiring. She could do with searching out more adventurous directors....the type that might not get her Oscar attention, but might push her in newer, much needed directions as an actress. Because she doesn't seem to be moving forward as a performer. Hence the Jodie Foster comparison. It's more of a slow burnout, than a dramatic career death. Not saying she can't get out of it. She could start working with younger, interesting directors and they could unlock new sides to her. But I don't know if she has the willingness to go there, or she'll just stick to her diet of staid Greer Garson-esque Oscarbait, and rely on them to stick the landing. I’m merely playing devils advocate, but you could argue the same for Winslet, no? She WON SAG, as well as an Emmy, BAFTA, two Golden Globes and was a close second for an Oscar in this time span as well. I’m not arguing that she’s a more impressive talent, but I do think it’s strange that people are acting like she’s done when A) it’s fairly common to see careers stall around her age, and B) it happened to the very person she’s being compared to here. I’m seeing a lot of stretching and reaching to explain why this is so much different for Winslet and I’m not seeing that. This isn’t Naomi Watts (who is no longer even an A-list prestige performer), I think it’s clear this she still commands a lot of respect and it feels like a more traditional slump than something worrisome at this point .
|
|
|
Post by TheAlwaysClassy on Jul 20, 2019 19:59:45 GMT
Winslet is the greater talent, but Kidman has had the better career (mostly because Winslet has been having a not-so-great decade)
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 21, 2019 5:14:03 GMT
Kidman went through an extended period of personal and professional unpopularity that would have destroyed 99% of careers, and came out the end of it reborn and stronger. It was unusual to say the least, and recalled the fall of Marlon Brando's image and career in the 1960's (despite doing some good work in his "slump" like Kidman) and his return to the career highs in the 1970's. Kidman was in part sustained during her period of unpopularity by her peers. While fans moved on to other actresses and critics were writing snarky pieces about whether her forehead could move, her fellow actors were giving her SAG nominations almost every other year for projects critics despised or fans could care less about (The Paperboy, Grace Of Monaco, Hemingway And Gellhorn). It was a quite remarkable run that kept Kidman viable as a "prestige" actress, despite the fact that her career obituary was being written with almost every failed project up until Lion.Winslet's circumstances are very different. She's not a tabloid target of hate campaigns like Kidman was. She's not as disliked as Kidman was during those years, where so-called critics were trying to consign her career to the dustbin of history. That's why, imho, Winslet's mid career malaise is more worrying for her. Kidman got out of her situation because she's comfortably the finest actress of her generation, a first ballot GOAT contender and one of the most imaginative of actors. She takes big risks, and sometimes they fail, but when they pay-off, they pay-off spectacularly (and have got back into the position she is in) . Winslet doesn't generally take big risks. It's more that Winslet's run out of tricks and surprises as an actress (Kidman never did), doesnt have that imagination and her taste in material is revealing itself to be quite basic. Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind feels a very long time ago now. The type of Oscarbait that served her so well in the 90's and 2000's feels a bit dated now. Her taste in commercial fare is also pretty uninspiring. She could do with searching out more adventurous directors....the type that might not get her Oscar attention, but might push her in newer, much needed directions as an actress. Because she doesn't seem to be moving forward as a performer. Hence the Jodie Foster comparison. It's more of a slow burnout, than a dramatic career death. Not saying she can't get out of it. She could start working with younger, interesting directors and they could unlock new sides to her. But I don't know if she has the willingness to go there, or she'll just stick to her diet of staid Greer Garson-esque Oscarbait, and rely on them to stick the landing. I’m merely playing devils advocate, but you could argue the same for Winslet, no? She WON SAG, as well as an Emmy, BAFTA, two Golden Globes and was a close second for an Oscar in this time span as well. I’m not arguing that she’s a more impressive talent, but I do think it’s strange that people are acting like she’s done when A) it’s fairly common to see careers stall around her age, and B) it happened to the very person she’s being compared to here. I’m seeing a lot of stretching and reaching to explain why this is so much different for Winslet and I’m not seeing that. This isn’t Naomi Watts (who is no longer even an A-list prestige performer), I think it’s clear this she still commands a lot of respect and it feels like a more traditional slump than something worrisome at this point . Winslet's slump happened after Mildred Pierce, so you are counting too many awards and nods to give her parity/superiority with Kidman in their worst periods (their career downturns did not happen at the exact same time, so you can't really start the count from when Winslet was still riding high. Makes no sense. Her reputation literally peaked with the Emmy win) . I'd say Her slump started with the universally reviled Movie 43. That's when her streak of "rotten" movies began. Since Movie 43, Winslet has made 10 movies. 9 of them have been rotten on Rotten Tomatoes (the lone exception being obviously Steve Jobs). That's a significantly poor run, and if she were as big a target among tabloids and press as Kidman has been, a lot more would have been made of it to try and seriously derail her career. So she is fortunate in that sense. But it's a deeply worrying run, not a minor slump. Yes, she was in a massively acclaimed movie (Steve Jobs) in that period, and got some personal awards and nods because of it. But it's not remotely comparable to SAG repeatedly saving Kidman's bacon for films and TV projects with extremely poor reviews and Rotten Tomatoe scores. That was a huge statement by Kidman's peers that we respect you enough to nominate you in anything, not just the things critics tell us are good. That was almost about Kidman's peer group rallying to save her career and show their respect. Without Steve Jobs being a critics darling, I honestly doubt SAG would have touched Winslet. More than Kidman, Winslet is reliant on acclaimed projects to thrive. I don't think Winslet's done at all. She'll Oscarbait as she always does and eventually do one that works again.It's all relative though. Post The Reader, circa Mildred Pierce, she was basically widely touted by many as the single greatest actress on the planet bar Meryl Streep. Because her awards bait rarely failed her. I think those days are done, even if she gets nominated again (heck, even if she wins again, I don't see her rep ever being that elevated again). So like I said, it's a relative thing. She'll always be respected like Jodie Foster, but Foster at one point in her 90's peak was touted as pretty much the equal of Streep (and whatever you think of Streep, she remains regarded as the gold standard for actresses by the media), and that's far, far from the case now. I'd say the same for Winslet. Just remains to be seen what level Winslet will end up being regarded as. Some have said Judi Dench, which I doubt, because part of what makes Dench who she is because she's regarded as one of the greatest stage actresses of all time, in addition to her film career. Winslet has zero stage pedigree. I've suggested she might be another Greer Garson , but in fairness that might also be a wrong call. So yeah, it'll be interesting to see how her rep and legacy pan out in the long term....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2019 12:11:41 GMT
pupdurcs - You're definitely leaving out The Dressmaker among Winslet's triumphs - she won the AACTA for Best Actress (against Theron in Mad Max) and universal praise for her work in that film - it was a huge hit in Australia. She was also Globe-nominated for Labor Day, another film that underperformed but for which she received warm notices. I still think Winslet is considered the more major talent among general audiences. Don't forget that she has Titanic - it's quite rare for a working actor to have such a juggernaut classic on his/her résumé. And the media goes insane when she and DiCaprio are pictured together, privately or publicly.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 21, 2019 15:57:55 GMT
pupdurcs - You're definitely leaving out The Dressmaker among Winslet's triumphs - she won the AACTA for Best Actress (against Theron in Mad Max) and universal praise for her work in that film - it was a huge hit in Australia. She was also Globe-nominated for Labor Day, another film that underperformed but for which she received warm notices. I still think Winslet is considered the more major talent among general audiences. Don't forget that she has Titanic - it's quite rare for a working actor to have such a juggernaut classic on his/her résumé. And the media goes insane when she and DiCaprio are pictured together, privately or publicly. I don't think I am overlooking The Dressmaker as a major triumph for Winslet. Everything about that was down to local (Australian) bias. A film with 47 on metacritic and 55% on Rotten Tomatoes sweeping the AACTA's is actually a huge indictment on the AACTA's for that year, suggesting that they were shamelessly in the tank for the biggest Australian production of that year, regardless of reviews. There's a reason it got barely awards recognition outside of Australia. It was one of the worst showings of hometown bias ever. I think the AACTA's have become more aware that they are gaining international significance, and I don't believe they'd ever let a critical failure dominate like The Dressmaker dominate the awards again, just because it was a hit at the Aussie box office. I don't know if there is any major divde as to who general audiences see as the greater talent, unless you want to take a You.Gov poll. Both are seen as prestige actresses at top of the tree who have been around for a long time. Especially since Kidman swept the awards for the first season of Big Little Lies, and is now going toe to toe with the most esteemed actress in human history ( Meryl Streep) in the second season and nobody is batting an eyelid, I think it's safe to say general audiences opinion of her is as high as it's ever been. Not to mention arguably stealing the show in Aquaman, a billion dollar grossing hit. In a what have you done for me lately industry and society, Kidman has done a lot more lately for people than Winslet. Wouldn't be shocked if general audiences currently regard her more as a talent than Winslet, though it's hard to be certain.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jul 22, 2019 23:58:27 GMT
Awards are great, but they don't decide someones ultimate legacy alone. Body of work, continued cinephile and audience support are factors among others that decide a legacy. Oh, that's interesting. I guess that now means Tom Hanks > Denzel Washington, contrary to your espousal. After all... 1. Hanks > Washington in Body of Work (much better regarded filmography with much more acclaimed directors) 2. Hanks > Washington in audience support (Hanks is perhaps top 5 all time as a movie star; definitely top 10. Washington is not even in the top 20) It's not like Hanks even trails Washington that very much in terms of awards. He's got 2 Lead Oscars, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics awards despite being 2 years younger. That's far less of a difference than that between Winslet and Kidman. Winslet has 3 more Oscar nominations, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics wins, despite being 8 years younger. I guess that's settled then. Kidman > Winslet. And Hanks > Washington.
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Jul 23, 2019 6:14:39 GMT
Yikes...how could we forget Kidman's comic triumph in a mainstream family comedy Paddington as a taxidermist out to stuff the bear for good! Kidman gives great hammy comic antagonist in a critically praised film and performance. She does have a respected mainstream comic vehicle after all (though she shares it with a stuffed bear). Paddington is definitely one of her better projects and she was really good in the role (even the hideous wig was bizarrely pitch perfect for her in it). It's a shame that she wasn't in the sequel. While Paddington 1 is good, 2 is truly next level brilliance.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 23, 2019 13:52:29 GMT
Awards are great, but they don't decide someones ultimate legacy alone. Body of work, continued cinephile and audience support are factors among others that decide a legacy. Oh, that's interesting. I guess that now means Tom Hanks > Denzel Washington, contrary to your espousal. After all... 1. Hanks > Washington in Body of Work (much better regarded filmography with much more acclaimed directors) 2. Hanks > Washington in audience support (Hanks is perhaps top 5 all time as a movie star; definitely top 10. Washington is not even in the top 20) It's not like Hanks even trails Washington that very much in terms of awards. He's got 2 Lead Oscars, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics awards despite being 2 years younger. That's far less of a difference than that between Winslet and Kidman. Winslet has 3 more Oscar nominations, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics wins, despite being 8 years younger. I guess that's settled then. Kidman > Winslet. And Hanks > Washington.
October 20th 2017 - same posts in this thread created by distain one of his many aliases on Gold Derby : same exact sh it, different year.....
Who wins Oscar number 2 first: Kidman or Winslet?
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 23, 2019 14:26:46 GMT
Oh, that's interesting. I guess that now means Tom Hanks > Denzel Washington, contrary to your espousal. After all... 1. Hanks > Washington in Body of Work (much better regarded filmography with much more acclaimed directors) 2. Hanks > Washington in audience support (Hanks is perhaps top 5 all time as a movie star; definitely top 10. Washington is not even in the top 20) It's not like Hanks even trails Washington that very much in terms of awards. He's got 2 Lead Oscars, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics awards despite being 2 years younger. That's far less of a difference than that between Winslet and Kidman. Winslet has 3 more Oscar nominations, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics wins, despite being 8 years younger. I guess that's settled then. Kidman > Winslet. And Hanks > Washington.
October 20th 2017 - same posts in this thread created by distain one of his many aliases on Gold Derby : same exact sh it, different year.....
Who wins Oscar number 2 first: Kidman or Winslet?
LOL! I really live rent free in you and Good Troll's head don't I. Gotta take friends where you can get 'em, I guess. I've got one handle on goldderby you clown, as I do on any site I might post on. I literally imagine you losers "Pm-ing" each other back and forth to exchange info to "expose" me . Like anyone other that you two obsessed-with-me jokers give a damn. Ooh, he posted on a different site....with a different name. See guys, look at him, he'evil. Pupdurcs posts on other sites and doesn't go by Pupdurcs on them. Stop this guyyyyyy . The desperation and ridiculousness you guys go through just for 'lil old me, never ceases to astonish me. I've never tried to disguise who I am on other boards, regardless not using the same handle everywhere (which is y'know, fairly normal). My posting style remains exactly the same. I'm not obligated to christian myself scrudpup on every board I may post on. You should appreciate that, as I've seen you post on numerous sites over the years with different handles. I just never bothered keeping track of them or especially cared. Though I do recall you joining one of those boards in recent years as ElMaurecan82 to campaign against Washington's Roman J Israel Esq nomination. That was fun to watch As usual, your hypocrisy astounds me (*cue frantic denials, stop lying, I am only pacinoyes everywhere blahblah*. As if anyone cares either way)
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 23, 2019 14:34:49 GMT
Nope - never anywhere else or anyone else - but you're always all of you.........and your aliases. I like Good God though and I thought this was a great post and I look forward to his future posts because........he's right. Seems like a nice guy - not sure what your problem is with him tbh. Oh, that's interesting. I guess that now means Tom Hanks > Denzel Washington, contrary to your espousal.
After all...
1. Hanks > Washington in Body of Work (much better regarded filmography with much more acclaimed directors) 2. Hanks > Washington in audience support (Hanks is perhaps top 5 all time as a movie star; definitely top 10. Washington is not even in the top 20)
It's not like Hanks even trails Washington that very much in terms of awards. He's got 2 Lead Oscars, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics awards despite being 2 years younger. That's far less of a difference than that between Winslet and Kidman. Winslet has 3 more Oscar nominations, more BAFTA nominations, and more top critics wins, despite being 8 years younger.
I guess that's settled then. Kidman > Winslet. And Hanks > Washington.
|
|