Kidman blows off "Fur"

email this story
read comments (14)
post a comment

Reactions to and explanations why Nicole Kidman has blown off promotional appearances on behalf of Fur (Picturehouse, 11.10), which, let's face it, is probably dead anyway no matter what anybody says or does.

Kennedy's violence speech<< previous | next >>Oscar cred = box-office cred

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on November 2, 2006 at 6:01 PM

comment #1

jeffmcm says ...

I think you forgot to put, you know, content on this thread.

Posted by jeffmcm at November 2, 2006 8:08 PM

comment #2

romeoisbleeding says ...

It's sad to say that about a movie when a handful of people have seen it and actually some of them have liked it. The reviews for this movie have been either love it or hate it but at least give it a freaking chance. It hasn't even opened yet. I would hate to be a moviemaker in this day and age and have your work sent to hell before it has even had a chance.

Posted by romeoisbleeding at November 2, 2006 8:21 PM

comment #3

Craig Kennedy says ...

Screw the reviews. I like Downey Jr. and Shainberg gets one free pass for the joy that was Secretary.

Maybe it's a train wreck but even that would be more interesting than something like A Good Year that opens the same weekend.

If it's just a steaming turd, then I'll be more careful about Mr. Shainberg in the future.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at November 2, 2006 9:55 PM

comment #4

The Winchester says ...

Kudos Romeo, for both your comment and your name. How many times have we heard, be it this site or many others, about a hyped up film that suddenly becomes tainted goods, when maybe only a small percentage of critics have seen the movie, and no one else has?

That's why I only trust the words of Earl Dittman. Never steered me wrong, that man has.

Posted by The Winchester at November 2, 2006 11:39 PM

comment #5

EDouglas says ...

Saw the movie last night and though it wasn't awful, it's certainly strange...and slow... and long. I really don't know what it has to do with Diane Arbus except that the woman in the movie is also a photographer.. but this has none of the dark humor of Secretary and most of the people I've spoken to haven't liked it or hated it... I thought it was just okay, and I can't see it being nominated for anything. Nicole Kidman needs to find a new agent because her choices lately have mostly been crap. (What was her last decent movie? The Hours?)

Posted by EDouglas at November 3, 2006 3:41 AM

comment #6

Larry says ...

"What was her last decent movie? The Hours?"

No, it's definitely not The Hours.

Posted by Larry at November 3, 2006 4:21 AM

comment #7

OddDuck says ...

I might be alone in this, but thought Birth was just completely awesome, due in major part to her (but also due to fucking awesome cinematography and a haunting score that I would gladly watch paint dry to).

Posted by OddDuck at November 3, 2006 5:18 AM

comment #8

romeoisbleeding says ...

The last thing I want to do is get into a pissing match here but I have to tell the poster a few posts up that I have a few friends who saw Fur in San Francisco last week and loved it. They have not stopped raving about it yet. So.. and yeah probably that same night some people walked out of that same screening half way through. That is my point.We need to have the chance to make up our own minds. But we are not able to when the small films are not even allowed to breathe. We need to give these kind of small films a chance and not bury them before they are born. I saw Running With Scissors last week and although it was not the movie I wanted it was ok. And ok can be sometimes ok because in this movie that has some trouble finding the right tone, you have some pretty damn good preformances. Everyone is all over Annette B. and she is great but mygod.. Jill Clayburgh is amazing in a scene near the end of the movie. Trust me .. see it for that alone. But you know this movie may not be playing anywhere soon because it has been deemed to be dead too. Or another one that was not given a chance is "A Guide to Recognizng Your Saints". Dianne Wiest has a scene in it that is Oscar worthy but no one will see it because this movie was given the last rites while it was still trying to get its first oxygen. One more sad thing before I stop ranting here. Some people read Jeff or David Poland and they let them dictate their tastes. If they say a movie is good they go and if they say it is dead they snicker at it. I read them every day too because I am a junkie for movie talk and they are good writers but god dammit.. don't be so quick to bury small films. Because you know what happens when you do that.. you end up living in a town like I do where tonight I have the choice of seeing Scream 3 or Grudge 4 or whatever they are and maybe one more screening of the damn Pirates movie. If I want to see a small film I have to drive 6o miles or get in a plane. ok. while I am here one more thing. If any of you end up seeing Fur check out the art direction. You can hate the story or pacing or tone or whatever but the art direction is awesome according to my friends. Sometimes that is all it takes to get me to a movie. Just sit back and take in the choices of colors and sets and enjoy. I hope I get the chance.

Posted by romeoisbleeding at November 3, 2006 6:01 AM

comment #9

IClavdivs says ...

Roger Friedman would have better served Fur by noting that Kidman already opted out of the premiere because she would have been/is in London. She already made the statement some 2 weeks ago about not being available close and up till the premiere date because she would not be in the country. Birth was dead in the water, too, but compared to those movies that went on to Oscar noms/wins, it is still being discussed and talked about. Fur is already garnering the same reaction. Oscar or no Oscar, I sure hope she keeps making movies like Birth and Fur, big departures from the same old, same old mudanes that baiters keep churning out.

Posted by IClavdivs at November 3, 2006 6:02 AM

comment #10

IClavdivs says ...

The last great movie Kidman did was Birth, a movie far greater than The Hours. Change her agent? I hope not.

Posted by IClavdivs at November 3, 2006 6:05 AM

comment #11

houmas says ...

I thought Dogville was brilliant, and Kidman was brilliant in it. Probably her best performance.

I like that Kidman isn't deterred by percieved "failure" of a project, to start playing it safe. Birth got kicked in the nuts by critics, but it's got a passionate band of supporters who think it's an underrrated gem. Dogville is also divisive, though it got greater critical support. Fur looks to be in similar territory (I 've heard some wildly divergent opinions on this flick, good and bad), which means I'm interested in seeing it.

She's deterimnedly reckless and fearless in her choices, and that's why she stands out among A-list Hollywood actresses. Kidman could easily accept every safe and formulaic "oscarbait" project that comes down the pipeline (like Charlize Theron's North Country), but she's so ridiculously eclectic, that it's impossible to pigeonhole her.

I'd take a dozen Dogvilles and Births, over one bland a$$ Mrs Henderson Presents and North Country, those easily classifiable, easily forgettable films that oscar voters seems to love.

Kidman's doing fine, missteps and all. I always look forward to what she does next (I suspect her villain role in The Golden Compass will satisfy both critically and commercially). Unlike the once interesting Johnny Depp, Hollywood hasn't quite yet succeeded in neutering her into an "eccentric" commodity.

Posted by houmas at November 3, 2006 7:01 AM

comment #12

Bilge says ...

FUR is a very, very good film and there's no reason to suspect that Kidman has problems with it. After all, she was at the Rome Film Festival for its premiere. People can speculate all they want, I suppose, but her husband's stint in rehab is certainly not imaginary, and I imagine she doesn't want to be asked any questions about that.

Some people obviously have problems with the fact that FUR is not a straight biopic, but rather a riff on Diane Arbus's life. I think that's a specious concern. By that standard, Tarkovsky's ANDREI RUBLEV is also suspect.

If people want a standard biopic, I'm sure there'll be more Capote movies on the way.

Posted by Bilge at November 3, 2006 1:07 PM

comment #13

Craig Kennedy says ...

Two of my favorite movies in 2006 pretty much stiffed at Rotten Tomatoes: Don't Come Knocking 42% and Notorious Bettie Page 57%. If I'd listened to the reviews I would've missed out on them.

I like to read reviews, but lately I try to wait until after I've seen the movie. I like to hear what other people think after I've made up my mind. If a movie I wasn't interested in gets a lot of critical buzz, then I might be convinced to have a look, but if I a movie I already want to see gets trashed, I try and see it anyway.

I've been burned a couple of times this year (Tideland for example) but a movie that tries for something interesting and fails can still be worthwhile.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at November 3, 2006 1:08 PM

comment #14