The Weinstein Company has unveiled the first trailer for the upcoming "Grace of Monaco" film, starring Nicole Kidman, Tim Roth, Paz Vega, Parker Posey, Frank Langella and Milo Ventimiglia. Check it out below.
Set in 1962, Monaco became a tax haven and got into a heated dispute with France. As a result, Charles De Gaulle gave Prince Rainer III, husband of Grace Kelly (Kidman), six months to change his tax laws. Kelly maneuvered behind the scenes to save Monaco from a coup.
The new movie is directed by Olivier Dahan (La Vie En Rose) and will hit theaters on November 27th, just in time for awards consideration.
biniwoowrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 7:47:44 AM
You can have my award Nicole.
And by award I mean d*ck.
Cannonwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 8:49:27 AM
A 46 yearold, Botoxed Kidman playing Grace Kelly, in her prime, at 33. What, they couldn't finde ANY other actress better suited for the part?
This sounds like a bullsh*t vanity project for Kidman both to trying to win an Oscar and to position herself as a modern day Kelly, which she most certaily is not.
PORN-FLYwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 10:01:38 AM
M. Bullittwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 10:17:08 AM
What Pornfly said!
Cannonwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 11:42:14 AM
What Bullitt said.
PORN-FLYwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 12:42:53 PM
M. Bullittwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 12:46:52 PM
Lol, both of you.
minkowskiwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 7:38:24 PM
Dunno about that folks...she may be kind of old, but she looks more like Grace Kelly than anyone else in Hollywood worth a damn.
I mean, name one actress who looks anything like Kelly. Lindsay Lohan? No, seriously, who?
Besides, Kelly was known for her looks first and foremost, so nailing down the physical would be paramount, just like they got Naomi Watts to play Diana even though a hundred actresses could have done that role better.
Oh why do I bother...wasting my time being the rational one here.
Cannonwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 8:02:55 PM
Except, Kidman doesn't really look like Kelly at all, at least not in my opinion. The similarities are superficial at best: blonde, blue eyes, high cheek bones. Such could apply to countless working actresses throughout North America, the UK, Europe and Australia, many of whom are more age appropriate.
Kelly had a wider and more full face, a different brow and her eyes were further apart. Her features altogether were much softer. Kidman by comparison is too birdlike, say nothing of her now strained Botox look. But there's also the overlapping expression and demeanor of the two, as Kelly was very easy-natured and demure whereas Kidman has always had that snooty, upper-crust persona.
Kidman wasn't chosen because she was ideal, is the most talented or the only available option. She was chosen for her name and star power.
minkowskiwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 8:29:56 PM
Name and star power? Who the hell knows Nicole Kidman? Nobody. She hasn't been in a movie anyone cared to see in twenty years. People in the 15-25 age range couldn't even put her name to a face, and the people above that range are too young to even remember Grace Kelly unless they saw Rear Window like me or they're some kind of film nerd like Triggax.
I do agree that this movie is of course typical Weinsteinian Jewtard Oscar bait, but I greatly disagree that Nicole Kidman doesn't resemble kelly , and I disagree any other actress could take the role.
Sure, sure, there's someone out there who is Kelly's doppleganger, but can they act? If so, do they have a name worthy of such a project?
Can you find an intersection of looks and talent among the set of available actresses? No. I can't. Not one I would want to take to the Oscars, and the Weinstein's agree, apparently as do plenty of people on IMDB, and one of Kelly's closest friends.
Is Nicole Kidman an exact duplicate of Kelly? No, but that's not the point. She can act well enough, has a crisp accent and looks enough like her.
Anyway, read the IMDb forums. People seem to agree. They named Charlize Theron as an alternative, but many, many people believe Nicole is the better actress, and I would agree. I also wouldn't try to take Theron to the Oscars if it were up to me.
Others suggested Sienna Miller, but she's classless and hardly Nicole Kidman's peer. She also doesn't look anything like Kelly beyond the surfer girl blond hair and blue eyes. Trying to take her the Oscars would be like taking Amanda Bynes to a debate club.
Another issue I have with what you say is that you claimed the movie is really just a Kidman vanity project, and that's not true. In fact, the script for the movie was previously on Hollywood's black list and more than few A-list actresses were in the running for the lead, including Jessica Chastain, Emily Blunt, Charlize Theron, Reese Witherspoon, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kate Hudson, Rosamund Pike, Amy Adams, January Jones and Elizabeth Banks.
I mean, look at that list. Who would YOU choose? Witherspoon and Banks for Kelly? LMAO. Yeah right. One looks like an anteater the other looks like she choked on a shovel. Chastain? Really? Paltrow?
From the list of available actresses, they obviously went with the most talented one who looked the most like Kelly in the ways that matter. They could have hired an unknown, but that would have been a mistake for obvious reasons.
As for why Kidman tried out for the role, who knows? Maybe she's just aiming for more acclaim, or maybe she's just doing what she does: trying out for roles and acting. It is her career, after all.
minkowskiwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 8:36:20 PM
Just KIDing, that's Grace Kelly.
Cannonwrites: on September 17th, 2013 at 9:09:19 PM
"They could have hired an unknown, but that would have been a mistake for obvious reasons."
That's kinda my point, as their reasons concern Oscar and award show season pedigree first and foremost rather than searching out an actress that would best serve the material. Audiences in general know Kidman a hell of a lot more than some up-and-comer out there who's potentially better for the part. And I don't think it unlikely that such an actress exists.
The fact that Kidman isn't a clone of Kelly isn't the problem for me per se; Michelle Williams doesn't much resemble Marilyn Monroe but I thought she did well playing the part (despite My Week with Marilyn being a mediocre film). I just don't think as you do that Kidman talented enough of an actress -- lacking those chameleon qualities that some thespians have -- to compensate for both the clashing screen persona and her age/plastic surgery.
steandricwrites: on September 18th, 2013 at 6:24:22 AM
Time and turn to say, for a start, she looks nothing like Princess Grace here, and so, this must be a flop.