Fugger: Nicole Kidman

Well Played Cover: Nicole Kidman on Vogue Australia, September 2015


We just saw Nicole Kidman on Vogue U.S., photographed by Patrick Demarchelier no less, looking pinched and cranky — the opposite of how flowy and charming she was in their “73 Questions” video (in the same post). Now Vogue Australia has one-upped the Mothership with what I think is a gorgeous shot of her chilling at Uluru in her native land. In sum, the American cover makes you think, “Remember when Nicole Kidman was one of the great beauties of her time?” THIS reminds you that she still IS.

react:

Fug or Fab: All of Nicole Kidman’s U.S. Vogue Covers, Including August 2015


So, raise your hand if you had this in the pool. My honest first reaction to seeing Nicole on Vogue was, “Zzz.” Not because I don’t like Kidman — I do; she seems warm in interviews, and I’ve never heard a bad story about her — but because she is to me the epitome of the boring and safe choice for a magazine that desperately needs to shed its reputation as boring and safe (that Hail Mary of a Kimye cover notwithstanding, and besides, it was still somehow boring). I’m sure Vogue feels like it’s in a thankless bind between its older, more affluent readers, and the younger set it needs to entice away from the likes of Elle, but seriously, you can walk that tightrope with Mindy Kaling, whose signature style on The Mindy Project is bright and relevant. Or Rachel McAdams, who is in two gritty projects that would seem to signal a potential crossroads, or at least a turning point. Or Jada Pinkett-Smith, who stole Gotham and then Magic Mike XXL. How about Melissa McCarthy? Uzo Aduba? Coco Rocha, the new mom and arguable main supermodel of this crop? Or stick a dude on there. JUST a dude, not Dude and Bride. The point is, I don’t begrudge Kidman a cover at all, but it feels like there is so much fertile territory elsewhere that we didn’t need ANOTHER story about how Nicole is grounded and real and talented and warm and loving and embraces her simple life in Nashville and digs on Keith Urban and is really happy now. Those are all wonderful things that I’ve read before.

That said: I decided to try and rustle up Nicole’s other covers, just to see if she’d been on it as frequently as I thought; a Salon story in 2014 that said she’d been on the cover seven times, so that would put this one at eight, and that bears out with the number of images that turned up.  What’s more, it appears her most recent one before this was a group cover promoting Nine from back in late 2009. Can that be possible? Nearly six years since she graced Anna’s big book? Do we think anyone at Vogue even knew it had been that long? I picture Hamish Bowles being, “She was just on it… wait, WHAT? SIX YEARS AGO?” before pressing a giant red alarm button. So perhaps the perception that she’s a perennial favorite lingers entirely because she owned it in the Aughts (and certainly she’s filled in the empty time with Elles and foreign Vogues and probably some InStyles, so it’s not like she’s been absent).

Which is your favorite? Eight covers puts her firmly ahead of Sarah Jessica Parker (six, per that same Salon piece). Is eight enough, as the heroic TV sitcom once so tenderly posited? Were you glad to see her on here again?

And finally, after the jump, a “73 Questions” video in which Nicole Kidman comes off as a very charming hang.

Read More

react:

Fugs and Fabs: The Crystal + Lucy Women In Film Awards


I have no idea what is happening here, but I hope shower caps are the new black.

[Photos: Getty]

react:

CMTs Fug or Fab Carpet: Nicole Kidman in Balenciaga (With an Assist from Keith Urban)


If these two ever break up, I will be distraught.

Loading ... Loading ...

[Photos: Getty]

react:

Fug or Fab: Nicole Kidman


Do you think she’s sad she’s not at Cannes this year? I am, mostly because Kidman is at her best at Cannes.

[Photos: Fame/Flynet]

react:

Oscars Fugs and Fabs: Patterns


I always love it when we get to make one of these and it’s longer than three slides. Please, patterns, have a moment.

[Photos: Getty]

react: