Nicole Kidman and Naomi Watts have been best friends for donkeys, so it seems only natural that Nicky would be thrilled for Naomi’s recent Oscar nomination for her work in The Impossible, the film about the 2004 tsunami in Thailand that’s based on a true story. (Side note: it’s good – see it if you haven’t!) Unfortunately, Nicole – who has always seemed a bit too much like her character in The Golden Compass, to me – is not really into it because she’s used to being the one in the limelight. So instead of getting over herself like any normal, mature adult would do, she’s just refusing to take part in any Oscar promo involving Naomi.
Give it to us, New York Daily News:
Naomi Watts will appear in an upcoming CBS Oscar segment to help with her Oscar campaign for Best Actress in The Impossible — and her best frenemy, Nicole Kidman, is refusing to participate.
Producers wanted Kidman to speak in a quick “five-minute” segment set to air on the network before the Academy Awards on Feb. 24. It was in discussion to be filmed with 60 Minutes correspondent Lara Logan and focuses on Watts’ dramatic turn in The Impossible.
“She declined,” snipes our insider. “Clearly she’s not inclined to help her friend because she’s jealous she’s not in this year’s Oscar’s spotlight.”
While an insider close to Kidman insists that the reason she couldn’t plug her pal on 60 Minutes had nothing to do with a case of sour grapes, producers aren’t buying it. “She couldn’t do it because of her schedule,” says the source. “It was a last-minute thing. Nicole and Naomi are best friends.”
But the source also took a swipe at Watts, saying that without Kidman, the segment is no longer important: “Not sure of the length or importance of it now without Nicole agreeing to it.”
Our original insider with knowledge of the segment isn’t backing down, however. “It was a ‘no’ right off the bat [for Nicole.] She could have made time if it was a priority,” says the source.
This bitch! Like, sorry The Paperboy was an absolute disaster and you haven’t been in a financially viable film since Australia – which was 2008, might I add – but you need to give your homegirl some support. Nothing reeks worse than a jealous shrew.
February 7, 2013 at 3:30 pm by Jennifer
The dress is fabulous, her figure is cute, if a little on the frail side, and her hair … um, color is really, really pretty.
The rest of the things that make this picture a picture? Like her Botoxy face and unfortunate hairline (what is that, anyway? Is that years of clip-in extensions and weaves gone bad? Is Nicole Kidman going to be the next Naomi Campbell, without the phone-throwing and Jazzy-riding?)
That dress, though. That is one heck of a dress, if I do say so myself.
Nicole Kidman’s whole getup—everything included—love it or leave it?
January 13, 2013 at 5:00 am by Sarah
I thought our life together was perfect. It took me a very long time to heal. It was a shock to my system. We were in a bubble, just the two of us. We became very dependent on one another. I was reeling with Tom. I would have gone to the ends of the earth for him…. I was totally smitten – I fell madly, passionately in love. I was so impulsive and naive.
—Nicole Kidman on what it was like when Tom Cruise decided that their eleven year marriage was over, which actually surprises me, because it makes me think something along the lines that Tom Cruise wasn’t always the crazy, controlling freak that he is today. No, it makes me think that he must have been relatively normal at some point for someone to care about him enough to be all sad and stuff during and after a divorce, instead of running and skipping with joy, celebrating a new life free of tyranny and oppression. And isn’t it nice to know that Tom Cruise wasn’t always this nuts? Nice for, you know, him?
November 13, 2012 at 4:30 pm by Sarah
“… I got married really fast and really young. But I don’t regret that because it got me (my children) Bella and Connor and I did have a fantastic marriage for a long period. Then when it didn’t work out I had to really dig deep and find my way through depression. I have no regrets about all of it. It was all part of growing up.”
So I suppose it’s not quite accurate to say that Tom Cruise literally depressed Nicole Kidman, because she kind of alludes to the fact that her depression was as a result of her split with Tom, who she wed when she was a young twenty-three, and with whom she spent eleven years. But I have no doubts that Scientology and craziness definitely attributed to her depression, because seriously. When you’re married to the Savior of Scientology and he, duh, loves Scientology, how does one—even one as lovely as Nicole Kidman, pre-Botox face—compare with that? How does one compare with the cryogenically-frozen L. Ron Hubbard DNA that was apparently just too high class for the likes of Nicole?
God. I’d be depressed, too.
October 3, 2012 at 5:30 pm by Sarah
Do you remember when Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman got divorced? I don’t, because I was too busy growing boobs and getting spitballs stuck in my hair on the bus, but I hear it was a pretty big deal. Apparently what happened was in 2001, Tom’s spokesperson announced their separation, and then two days later Tom filed for divorce. Nicole, meanwhile, was just like “what?” She was also three months pregnant when Tom filed, and she miscarried just a little bit after that. When Tom heard that news, he was (allegedly) pretty “whatever” about it. So basically it was a weird, awful situation all around, and everyone felt sorry for poor Nicole Kidman.
Nicole Kidman has allegedly been in touch with Tom Cruise’s soon-to-be third ex-wife Katie Holmes and has reportedly told her to “stay strong”.
Last week, the Aussie actress was reportedly “laying low” after news broke that Katie was filing for divorce after five years of marriage to the ‘Mission: Impossible’ star.
Now magazine have since reported that Nicole and Katie have been in touch, with Nicole offering her advice but the magazine also reports that she was not surprised by the split which has left Hollywood in shock.
“Nicole told her to stay strong,” a source told Now magazine. “She and Katie have only spoken a handful of times, but Nicole always secretly thought she was a lot stronger than she seemed.”
They also added: “She was convinced Katie would ‘snap’ one day. She was right.”
Nicole has two children with Tom, Isabella and Connor, and after a 10 year marriage to the actor, Nicole has moved on with new husband Keith Urban and have two children together.
Since that story was published, Nicole’s rep denied it, but I don’t really buy the denial. I want to believe that Nicole thinks it’s wonderful that Tom is finally getting what’s been coming to him for a while now, and the denial was issued because she wants to keep herself out of this Scientology shitstorm as much as possible.
Here’s hoping that Katie and Nicole become united in trashing Tom to the media, and that when Tom starts looking for love again, he goes for someone who was originally on the list with Katie Holmes: Lindsay Lohan. A girl can dream, right?
July 11, 2012 at 4:30 am by Emily
No wonder Zac has such a public hard-on for Nicole. It’s all coming together now! She pissed on his face, and he’s been sprung ever since!
From Contact Music:
The scene takes place after Efron’s character, Jack, storms off in a fury of teenage angst. He swims out to sea to calm himself down but gets stung by a jellyfish in the process. Kidman pushes aside a group of girls who are about to pee on his stings and does it herself.
Matthew Mcconaughey (‘The Lincoln Lawyer’), who plays Jack’s brother, insists that that is the correct way to treat a jellyfish sting, while John Cusack (‘Being John Malkovich’), who plays a prisoner in correspondence with Kidman, remarks ‘Of all the things in the movie that are shocking, that was kind of a light scene!’
People who protested to the screening at Cannes Film Festival included Empire’s Nick de Semlyen who posted on Twitter, ‘Did not wake up today expecting to almost instantly see Nicole Kidman p*ssing on Zac Efron’s face. Thanks for that, The Paperboy.#Cannes.’
See what happens here? Zac Efron gets a taste (um, literally) of the A-list and he thinks he’s all Don Juan DeMarco now. It’s the only other explanation for all of his silly little interviews talking about the simplicity of taking off bras and dropping MAGNUM condoms on the red carpet during photo calls … it’s all starting to gel for me, and I have to say—I couldn’t be laughing harder right now.
And the recent write-up in People makes this whole thing even funnier:
The movie, directed by Lee Daniels (Precious), is set in Florida in 1969 amid racial strife. Efron is 20-year-old Jack, the younger brother of a journalist (played by Matthew McConaughey) who has come back to his family’s small town to investigate whether a man was wrongly condemned to death row. Kidman’s character is fixated on the inmate.
In one early scene, Kidman tears off her pantyhose and has an orgasm while visiting the prisoner (played by John Cusack) on death row. Later, her character urinates on Efron on a beach after he is stung by jellyfish.
Of the film, Zac says:
“I don’t think I was supposed to feel comfortable,” he explained of the revealing [white underwear] shoot. “It’s like life. This character is supposed to be learning the ways of the world, and that can be very uncomfortable. But it’s also exciting.”
Oh, honey, of course it is. You’re twenty-four years old. Let’s just see how you feel about being peed on by a sixty-year-old when you’re forty, though, OK? Then we’ll go on and talk about the ways of the world, alright, sweetheart?