First photos of Nicole Kidman as Grace Kelly: is she pulling it off?

Almost a year ago exactly, producers announced a new project called Grace of Monaco, which would tell the story of then-33-year-old Grace Kelly/Her Serene Highness Princess Grace, and the 1962 tax dispute between Monaco and France. The part of Grace Kelly would have been a huge “get” for most actresses, and many, many names were floated as possible candidates. None of those names were “Nicole Kidman”. But Nicole got the part anyway, much to my dismay (and the dismay of many others). It’s not that Nicole isn’t capable of the Grace Kelly-esque regal-ness or ice-princess-ness. It really is about AGE. Nicole is 45 years old, and she been ravaging her natural beauty with Botox and fillers and lip augmentation for years. She will never look 33 years old again.

So, these are the first photos from the Grace of Monaco set in Menton, France. Nicole has been talking about this role for a few months, and you could tell that she was super-excited to do it. Tim Roth is playing Prince Rainier III… that seems like a particularly bizarre choice too. Is it just me or has Nicole moved beyond the point where we can give her and her films the benefit of the doubt? Like… I thought Hemingway & Gellhorn sounded like an interesting project, but then I saw some clips of it, and it just seemed like Nicole was the most awful part. Is that how it is with her now? Too much Botox, too many bad movies (remember that one with Nicholas Cage?!), too much delusion about where her career should actually be right now.

As for these photos and how Nicole looks… her lips are still driving me crazy. Grace was not a strawberry blonde. And I don’t really understand why her costume is so oversized – I just checked Grace’s Wiki, she was not pregnant in 1962, so why the maternity clothes?

But yes, from a distance, she sort of resembles Grace. Squint and stand back a little. It’s not as awkwardly offensive as Naomi Watts as Princess Diana, but it’s still not great.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

101 Responses to “First photos of Nicole Kidman as Grace Kelly: is she pulling it off?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Celeste says:

    Sorry, she’s just too old to pull it off.

  2. Charlotte says:

    I feel like this is a huge gag. Jeremy Beadle, Ashton Kutcher et al will run out any moment and we’ll finally ‘get’ it. Right?
    Otherwise, it’s just like watching a sad delusion play out. Nicole should not be a joke.

  3. Jordan says:

    Yes…I must agree, waaay to old and I’m also confused as to why Nicole is sporting strawberry blonde hair???. Grace was a cool, cool blonde. I also can’t get past all the plastic surgery….why oh why, Nicole?.

  4. Aussie girl says:

    Those lips! Nicole what did you do??? She also has a case of red eyes again.

  5. Eleonor says:

    Nicole Kidman ten years ago,with less botox and plastic surgery could have been a great Princess Kelly, now she looks not bad, but not even good. She looks meh.

  6. jamie says:

    Ageing has been getting me down lately. I think she looks great for 44 and wish I had her skin (or could afford a little tweaking).

    Anyone have a recommendation for creams to reduce/hide smile lines? I’m still in my 20s but they are coming in FULL FORCE.

    • Brown says:

      I use Aveeno “Positively Ageless” night cream every night. They sell it at the drug store (I’m not really into paying out the ass for beauty products… yet I just bought the entire box set of Ghost Hunters on DVD… priorities, right?) I’m in my 20s, too, but I figure why not start early… my mom has pretty bad wrinkles but she has also smoked since her teens, so that is a definite contributor. Anyway, I love the Aveeno cream, but I guess I can’t really give any insight into whether it helps in the long-term. I’ll check back with you in 20 years or so.

      • India says:

        I am 59 and everyone tells me constantly I look 30 yrs younger. My secret is I have been taking cod liver oil for 30 yrs and I also use Retin -A. Both the cod liver oil which I take in soft gel form and the Retin-A are made from vitamin A. Both are tremendously fabulous for the skin. You must use both every day. They are not quick fixes, it takes time but boy do they work. Your smile lines will soften in about 6 months. Put the Retin-A on before moisturizer. Good luck.

    • tmbg says:

      Retin-A is probably your best bet, but it’s irritating, so if you’re going to try it, get the weakest strength in the cream formulation to start with.

      Another trick I learned is if it’s still proving irritating, you can add some of your own moisturizer to it to make it more emollient or do short contact therapy, where you apply it, leave on for X amount of time and wash off. I have never used it long enough to see if it helps. I get pink and dry when I use it. :\

    • mystified says:

      India
      I hate to sound dumb but are you supposed to ingest the cod liver oil, apply it to your skin or both?

    • Jaded says:

      No more sun-tanning, use an exfoliant regularly – I recommend Olay Regenerist Thermal Skin Polisher – and a mild retinol cream at night.

      • Jools says:

        Also, use SPF on your face, neck, hands and chest. I use a moisturizer with 50 SPF on my face everyday. I have virtually no wrinkles and am 44 (I do smoke though, so, not all smokers get massive lines.)

        I also never lay in the sun. Wash my face twice per day and eat barely any processed foods. If I don’t cook it myself, I don’t eat it.

  7. neelyo says:

    I know I’m in the minority here but Grace Kelly bores the shit out of me. Yeah she was pretty in a country club way but beyond blond hair, blue eyes and good teeth, what else can you say about her? There’s nothing interesting about her looks like there was with Sophia Loren, Ava Gardner, Gene Tierney or even Kim Novak. And she could not act. If you don’t believe me, try to sit through THE COUNTRY GIRL, her Oscar movie that nobody ever brings up when talking about the legend of Grace Kelly. She’s fine in the Hitchcock films, but if she hadn’t married the prince she would have been forgotten.

    So I guess I’m saying I don’t care if Kidman looks like her because even if she did, I can’t imagine an interesting film about Kelly. Especially after she got out all of her slutting out of the way in the early 50s.

    • Green_Eyes says:

      Agree totally, and then there is Jane Russell, Rosalind Russell, Rita Hayworth, and even Susan Hayworth… They had interesting lives as well….. Grace Kelly married a Prince, moved to Monocco became a Princess and boring. Her daughters had a lot of problems, sadness, and interesting lives..but the Grace, no…

    • Minty says:

      Grace Kelly’s movie persona was that of an upper class society girl, complete with faux English accent and cool demeanor. I think that type was more popular with the public 50 years ago. She was pretty and polished, but she came off very remote and perhaps less relatable as a result. January Jones is a cheapo budget version of Grace. And having seen January in interviews and as host on Saturday Night Live, I think January in real life IS remote and devoid of warmth.

      Grace’s romantic life was anything but boring. She had affairs with her married co-stars. It’s fair to say she was a bit of a homewrecker. Industry people were aware of her behavior, the public not so much, because she was discreet and the studios covered up those things.

      What bugs though, is that she often gets a pass and Marilyn Monroe gets labeled a slut again and again. Marilyn’s movie persona was bombshell/sex symbol, but in reality Grace was far more promiscuous (that’s saying a lot in Hollywood), yet people conveniently ignore her history because they would rather believe in the persona (Grace as a well-bred lady), not the real person.

      Anyway, I agree with everyone. Nicole is too old and too plasticky to be convincing. Everything revolves around money, so producers would rather hire a big name to lure moviegoers than an unknown who has the talent and the resemblance.

    • LucyOriginal says:

      Neelyo: I agree with you! If she hadn’t married a Prince, she would not had become this “legend”. Many wannabes in Hollywood aspire to be like her, not in the talent department, but in the “lucky” department to marry a Prince or someone influential…

    • Stephanie says:

      Supposedly she saved Monaco by reinventing it…

  8. shirls says:

    She looks like lana del rey in the second picture

  9. ms. heart says:

    first thing I thought was it must be some inside Oz-Joke between her and her pal Naomi to play Royals.

  10. LeslieM says:

    Hair’s completely wrong. Clothes are hanging off her. She just not right to play this part at all. Grace Kelly was much more beautiful and had much more grace. I’m trying to thing of who would be better. Maybe Diane Krugger?

  11. dorothy says:

    She’s beautiful, but too old to play Grace. Diane Krugger is an excelent choice LeslieM.

  12. Quinn says:

    She looks like she donned the same wig she wore for Bewitched and called it a day.

  13. Just U says:

    Paltrow must be cursing her from a height!!!

    • poppy says:

      lol. you know goop’s always wanted this role.
      goop’s been trying to get the money to produce herself as marlene dietrich in a dietrich bio-pic. for some reason she hasn’t gotten the backing. some say this is why she and madonna fell out.
      in the mean time she’ll be shilling goop.

  14. hillbillyinthecorner says:

    Lets see …
    Marilyn Monroe….check…completely wrong..not even close….with Michele whats her name ..

    Elizabeth Taylor….check….complete and utter desaster with Lindsay Lohan ..hell Rosey O’Donnel would have been closer in looks

    Grace Kelly…..check…..could they have gotten any farther from what she looked like….Grace had welll grace, and elegance and was smooth and cool…everything Nichole Kidman is NOT…and shes way to old….I know it sounds crazy but one of those Fanning girls would have been better the younger one has that same elegant look and could be made to look 33….a hell of a lot easier then making a 46 yr old look 33….

    • dooliloo says:

      And apparently Zoe Saldana as Nina Simone… *sigh*

      • Jo 'Mama' Besser says:

        My ass is fully chapped on that one. How is it honouring Simone to indulge in the same kind of colourism against which the woman fought vehemently for decades? Welcome to Showboat 2.

      • Amelia says:

        Wait, WHAT?
        Zoe Saldana? Give me strength. She doesn’t have the acting chops (from what I’ve seen of her) and resemblance wise … Ugh. I need a cracktini.

      • dooliloo says:

        Right??? never got the hype around her, perhaps she seems like a cool girl and has the body of a model hence why magazines go crazy for her at times, but her acting skills are meh at best!

        Anyway regarding the project even Nina daughter said this (found her interview) :
        “As an actress I respect Zoe process, but I also know that there are many actresses out there, known or not, who would be great as my mother. The one actress that I’ve had in my heart for a very long time, whose work I’m familiar with already, is Kimberly Elise. Many people have spoken to me about Viola. I love her look. I love her energy. Both of the actresses that I’ve mentioned are women of colour, are women with beautiful, luscious lips and wide noses, and who know their craft. I also have no problem introducing someone we’ve never heard of before who can play my mother.”
        I believe it was a very polite way of saying “No thank you no Zoe please!”

      • LucyOriginal says:

        My heart stopped for a second when I read this one, :o . Zoe Saldana to play Nina? Nina Simone? Whatttttt?! As if…she can pull it off.

  15. lower-case deb says:

    remember this?
    http://www.vanityfair.com/video/2010/08/599552573001

    “…on board the Sovereign, where she talked to senior West Coast editor Krista Smith about Judy Garland, Grace Kelly, and the films she hopes will revive her once-dazzling career.”

    aren’t you glad it’s not HER (!)
    i’ll take kidman any day.
    CGI will do the rest, if anything.

  16. Blue says:

    Is this a low budget movie or something? I mean Nicole Kidman just looks like Nicole Kidman in a wig. The clothes are just hanging off of her. I just don’t get it.

  17. Suzie says:

    Nicole’s eyes have their own inherent expression, as well as her mouth and smile, and are too distinctively Nicole to be Grace Kelly but an actress is not expected to look like a clone of the person they are portraying, are they? I would have thought the real key is capturing the personality and mannerisms, and dress and hair style, etc. Meryl Streep is quite good at being a chameleon actress in portraying others.

  18. KC says:

    *sigh* Why oh why did they choose Nicole for this? Maybe they’ll do what they did for Jeff Bridges in the Tron “sequel” and CGI her to looking like a younger version of herself.

    Not a diss of her talent — she’s an amazing actress. As I’ve said before, I’d feel exactly the same way if Brad Pitt was cast as James Dean. Sometimes, you’ve just aged out of certain roles.

    • j.eyre says:

      Oh my gosh – you’re right. Her look is much closer. But Grace Kelly was supposed to be quite warm and personable. I have yet to see January come close to that.

      • B says:

        Grace Kelly warm and personable? I’ve always thought her as more aloof, and like someone upthread noted, “remote”. Beautiful, but not accessible-in other words, the very definition of a cool blonde.

        I think January Jones would have nailed it-both in looks and demeanor.

        ETA: Jones tells Britain’s The Times, “I’ve been offered a couple of TV movies playing Grace Kelly and there was no way I would touch them with a seven foot pole. It would be career suicide. No one would watch them and come away saying anything other than, ‘She’s so not Grace Kelly.’

        “Cate Blanchett got it right as Katharine Hepburn, but generally it doesn’t matter how much you look like that person or how good an actor you are, it’s impossible.”

  19. Christine says:

    It’s not just Nicole who is delusional, but whomever is approving these casting choices. And Grace Kelly was a beautiful, stunning white hot blonde. Not redhead. That seems pretty basic to have missed, or ignored.

  20. India says:

    Diane Kruger or Charlize Theron would have been a million times better. Nic looks weird with all that she has done to herself.

  21. Debra says:

    She looks like Samantha from Bewitched.
    Just in time for halloween.

  22. emmieapricot says:

    NO! Grace was a natural beauty — Nicole is not. January Jones should have this role.

  23. Jules says:

    Someone younger -and not jacked up on Botox/fillers, whatever- would have been a better choice.

  24. Michele says:

    I like Nicole Kidman and think she’s a good actress but she is so wrong for this part. I felt the same way when Naomi Watts was cast as Princess Diana. Both women are too old at this point and look nothing like the iconic women they are supposed to be portraying. In Naomi’s case, she is at least 5 inches too short for the role. At least Nicole has Grace Kelly’s long, slender, willowy body type.

  25. Paloma says:

    This is an example of horrible casting. She looks nothing like Grace Kelly.

  26. Ravensdaughter says:

    OMG, no! She’s too old and her lips are too distracting. She and Naomi Watts as Diana-definite tossup as to which casting decision was more of a disaster!

  27. Mrs. Darcy says:

    Agree Diane or Charlize (or ANYONE) would have been a much closer fit. I just see no resemblance whatsoever,even had they got the hair right, not to mention she is almost twenty years older than Grace Kelly was when she retired from movies. Such a casting fail, can’t imagine this will ever work.

  28. bns says:

    Nicole is too old and too botoxed, but she is an amazing actress. One of the best. Diane Kruger and January Jones don’t have the acting chops to pull this off.

  29. Dredz says:

    No, nope, no… She ruined Australia with her lack of expression. The only saving grace was Hugh Jackman shirtless

  30. lori says:

    I never watch bio pics. Lately the casting of these things has been crazy. I mean Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs? Explain that to me someone.

  31. Tonia says:

    i think elizabeth olsen would have been great for the role!

  32. MST says:

    I like Nicole, but Grace Kelly was more curvaceous — she was never bone thin. I like Grace too, because like me she was a PHILLY GIRL!

  33. Jaded says:

    Charlize Theron, hands down, would have been a great Grace Kelly. She has that tall, icy cool, elegant look that Grace had. Nicole is pretty but so much in an injected, botoxed way that no amount of acting talent will pull it off.

  34. Jess says:

    I think this would have been a great role for Sienna Miller.

  35. JankyWhiteGirl says:

    Nicole is turning into Norma Desmond.

  36. Cinesnatch says:

    If you haven’t seen Rabbit Hole, then, you shouldn’t make any judgments on Kidman’s film choices and performances. Just sayin’.

  37. Uh - no says:

    On-topic, she looks nothing like Her Royal Grace-ness. To the poster asking about laugh lines, ANY product containing hyaluronic acid works WONDERS. 51 and look 35 here…

  38. holly hobby says:

    Nope. Nose is too pointy. Eyes are too squinty and she’s too old!

  39. Krissie says:

    January jones would be the perfect grace Kelly. Her Betty draper always reminds me of grace.

  40. Luls says:

    Ugghh her lips and eyebrows. She has botoxed & fillered her face into oblivion. What a shame.
    besides the fact that she can no longer emote as an actress.

    CHARLIZE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CAST!
    She is Nicole 10 years ago. And I daresay an even better actress.

  41. skuddles says:

    This is as bad as Naomi Watts playing Princess Di. Wrong look, wrong age.

  42. Camille (TheOriginal) says:

    NK playing GK is far more offensive to me than the Naomi/Diana casting. Terrible.

    And what little I saw of that Hemmingway movie she was definitely the worst thing in it, not to mention the movie was just boring as hell so I didn’t/couldn’t watch the whole thing. Not even for Clive.

  43. FuefinaWG says:

    Keep in mind that the on-set lighting may change her hair color to the perfect shade of blonde.

  44. dj says:

    These pictures of Nicole just make me sad. I remember how beautiful the shape of her lips were back in the day. Unfortunately, she looks like Daisy Duck now.

  45. heynow says:

    I think Rosamund Pike would have been a brillliant choice.

  46. LouLou says:

    No. Those fish lips ruin it. She could, however, play the Joker.

  47. phaksi says:

    She looks a lot better than she did at the Emmys

  48. Ella says:

    Grace Kelly didn’t have pillow lips.

  49. Camla says:

    LOVE Nicole; she will be great! Regardless of the perfection of the ‘look’, I have no doubt she will totally convey the essence of Grace. Very much looking forward to the movie!

  50. Sam says:

    Kidman is a mediocre talent. Always has been. She deliberately chooses a broad range of film roles to give the illusion there is diversity and talent but in fact it’s mostly just kidman playing kidman.