In Defense of Nicole Kidman

With Australia set to only make around 20 million for the 5-day Thanksgiving weekend, people are already sinking their teeth into Nicole Kidman, blaming her for the film's "failure"and calling her box-office poison because of a string of bombs at the box-office. I find this incredibly unfair, as it lays the blame of any disappointing film gross solely on her feet, it diminishes the actual talent she possesses, and if one actally analyzes the box-office grosses of her films over the last few years, it's not true. Let's go through each of the films Nicole's made since becoming a big star, after having been in Moulin Rouge! and The Others, exluding voice work (Happy Feet) and any small, indie film which wasn't meant for blockbuster status (Dogville, Birth, Margot at the Wedding, Fur).

The Hours Budget: 25 million Gross: 108 million
The Human Stain Budget: 30 million Gross: 24 million
Cold Mountain Budget: 79 million Gross: 173 million
The Stepford Wives Budget: 90 million Gross: 102 million
The Interpreter Budget: 80 million Gross: 162 million
Bewitched Budget: 85 million Gross: 131 million
The Invasion Budget: 80 million Gross: 40 million
The Golden Compass Budget: 180 million Gross: 372 million

Looking at those figures, there's only one outright bomb, The Invasion, two disappointments, The Human Stain and The Stepford Wives, and one could-have-been-a-hit-if-the-studio-wasn't-retarded-and-sold-off-the international-distribution-rights, The Golden Compass. Kidman's films might not do well domestically, but she's a huge draw internationally, particularly in Europe and her home country of Australia, so it's ridiculous to brush her off as being unbankable. As for the films that didn't do well, their failures cannot be attributed to her. The Stepford Wives was a crap movie, The Human Stain needed good word of mouth and awards attention, neither of which it got, in order to catch on, and as for The Golden Compass, who thought a film based on a controversial, anti-religious book aimed at kids and young adults would do well in the U.S? Seriously! That movie was going to make it's money over-seas, and the studio was idiotic to sell its international distribution rights, erasing any profit it could have made.
Putting all of this aside, the problem of criticizing Kidman's box-office numbers is that it measures success not by talent, but by money earned. Yes, I get the fact that it is a business, but acting is an artform, and it should be judged on how well one can create a character that works within the film. Kidman's salary for large studio pictures can openly be scrutinized, Maybe it is too big, though I think she brings international success and pedigree to a film, which makes her worth her asking price, but I don't think she should have to suffer the criticism of being called box-office poison and told to quit acting. She is a talented and adventurous actress willing to take huge paycuts in order to work with up-and-coming indie directors and foreign auteurs. The two most bankable actresses currently working in Hollywood are probably Cameron Diaz and Reese Witherspoon, and while I like both of them, at their best, they are nowhere near close to Kidman's best.