Top Stories

Nicole Kidman & Mia Wasikowska: 'Stoker' Sundance Portraits!

Nicole Kidman & Mia Wasikowska: 'Stoker' Sundance Portraits!

Nicole Kidman and her Stoker co-stars Matthew Goode and Mia Wasikowska pose for a portrait session during the 2013 Sundance Film Festival on Monday (January 21) at Village at the Lift in Park City, Utah.

The 45-year-old actress was also joined by the film’s director Park Chan-wook at the photo session.

PHOTOS: Check out the latest pics of Nicole Kidman

The night before, Nicole, Mia, and Matthew all attended the film’s premiere at the festival.

FYI: Nicole is wearing a L’Wren Scott top and jacket with J Brand jeans. Mia is wearing a Prada cardigan, a Chloe top, and Samantha Pleat jeans.

30+ pictures inside of Nicole Kidman and the Stoker cast at the session…

Like Just Jared on Facebook
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 01
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 02
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 03
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 04
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 05
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 06
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 07
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 08
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 09
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 10
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 11
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 12
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 13
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 14
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 15
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 16
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 17
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 18
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 19
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 20
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 21
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 22
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 23
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 24
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 25
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 26
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 27
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 28
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 29
nicole kidman mia wasikowska stoker sundance portraits 30

Credit: Larry Busacca; Photos: Getty
Posted to: 2013 Sundance Film Festival, Matthew Goode, Mia Wasikowska, Nicole Kidman

JJ Links Around The Web

Getty
  • Audrina Patridge and her boyfriend Corey Bohan have split after five years- US Weekly
  • Lisa Kudrow completed her jury duty in one day- TMZ
  • Bachelorette runner-up Nick Viall spills the beans on intimate night with Andi Dorfman- Gossip Cop
  • Watch the new music video for Hunter Hayes' song "Tattoo"- Just Jared Jr
  • Eva Green is in talks to star in Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children- Entertainment Weekly
  • Childish Gambino calls out Drake and Kendrick Lamar in freestyle - Huffington Post
  • Read a recap for the latest episode of Masters of Sex- Lainey Gossip
  • Kathy Griffin resigns with WME after four month stint at CAA- The Hollywood Reporter
  • Cassie shows off her bikini body during vacation with boyfriend Sean John- Hollywood Tuna

29 Comments

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
# 1

Beautiful I want to watch this movie

# 2
Pretty Ka @ 01/21/2013 at 7:19 pm

Cute portraits. I’m dying to watch this movie!!! :)

# 3

Sundance Review: “Silly & Cartoonish ‘Stoker’ Is A Garish Misfire For Park Chan-Wook” … Another bomb to add to Kidman’s CV.

# 4

@..:

One of many reviews. Most were positive.

# 5

nicole is amazing

# 6
Skeptics Are Stupid @ 01/21/2013 at 9:38 pm

..: Delusional skeptic won’t post link to a silly Indiewire review which also threw Paperboy under the bus then backtracked with praise for Kidman from Anne Thompson.

Read a REAL review from a source like Variety. Another stunning performance from Kidman. Nicole won’t be doing roles that please everyone and basically be pretty wallpaper.

That’s the skeptics’ big problem. They want Kidman to disappear and it won’t happen.

# 7

Nicole Kidman is so talented and lovely. She does make me giggle though. I suspect she is ADD. In the pictures her shirt is half tucked and one half out. There are times her slip is hanging out, Keith’s tie needs adjusting, etc., etc. She just doesn’t see the little things. She looks happy and content and, I guess, that is what is important.

# 8

There is no way.an actress like Nicole Kidman, with the intense focus and concentration her roles require, has ADD. Get photographed as much as she does and you’d find things to nitpick over too.

# 9
ANONYMOUSE @ 01/22/2013 at 3:38 am

Nice pictures. Mia is pretty too. I can see the chemistry between them as an ensemble. I think we will see a great career roll out for Mia. The lead actors have her under their wings here and she looks very happy about that.

I feel, it would have been more respect if JJ had included Mathew’s and possibly Chan-Wook’s names in the headline … they could have done something playful with the name/word Park. :)

I look forward to seeing this film, and making up my own mind about everything to do with it. I have to wait patiently in line.

ANONYMOUSE @ 01/22/2013 at 3:43 am

@uh no.:

I agree. It is clear that many times she has to get dressed real quick. She does get around!! In any case, the cardie or jumper over a ‘relaxed’ shirt is a Kidman signature.

What I WILL say about her clothes, is that I am really envious of all those many many wonderful clothes she gets to wear … mostly, with such fine fabrics used, and the craftsmanship, they must FEEL wonderful on. (Apart from those that NK says she would prefer to be able to ‘bend’ in – at the afterparties; irrespective of how gorgeous that gown is.)

Nicole looks like their grandma.

anonymouse @ 01/22/2013 at 7:31 am

very nicely written crit:

Posted: Mon., Jan. 21, 2013, 3:33am PT
Sundance
Stoker
By GUY LODGE

Matthew Goode, Nicole Kidman and Mia Wasikowska in “Stoker.”

A Fox Searchlight release and presentation of a Scott Free production, in association with Indian Paintbrush, Dayday Films, Ingenious Media. Produced by Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, Michael Costigan. Executive producers, Steven Rayles, Mark Roybal. Co-producers, Wentworth Miller, Bergen Swanson, Wonjo Jeong, Michael Ellenberg. Directed by Park Chan-wook. Screenplay, Wentworth Miller.
India Stoker – Mia Wasikowska
Charles Stoker – Matthew Goode
Evelyn Stoker – Nicole Kidman
Gwendolyn Stoker – Jacki Weaver
Richard Stoker – Dermot Mulroney
Whip – Alden Ehrenreich
Mrs. McGarrick – Phyllis Somerville
Sheriff – Ralph Brown
Mr. Feldman – Harmony Korine
Pitts – Lucas Till
When South Korean genre iconoclast Park Chan-wook decided to bring his peculiar gifts to a Stateside production, anything could have happened – and anything pretty much does in “Stoker,” a splendidly demented gumbo of Hitchcock thriller, American Gothic fairy tale and a contemporary kink all Park’s own. Led by a brilliant Mia Wasikowska as an introverted teenager whose personal and sexual awakening arrives with the unraveling of a macabre family mystery, this exquisitely designed and scored pic will bewilder as many viewers as it bewitches, making ancillary immortality a safer bet than “Black Swan”-style crossover biz for Fox Searchlight’s marvelously mad March hare.
Earmarking future cult items is a fool’s errand, but Park’s film nonetheless stands to be treasured not just by his existing band of devotees, who should recognize enough of the “Oldboy” and “Thirst” director’s loopy eroticism and singular mise-en-scene amid the studio gloss, but by epicurean horror buffs, camp aficionados and even a small, hip sect of post-”Twilight” youths.

Not all those auds will follow the stream of wink-wink storytelling references in the brazenly nasty script by Wentworth Miller, the British-born actor best known for his work in TV’s “Prison Break,” here making his feature writing debut. None is more blatant than the naming of Matthew Goode’s antagonist figure. When morbid-minded honor student India (Wasikowska) loses her beloved father, Richard (Dermot Mulroney), in an apparent freak car accident, the ink is barely dry on the death certificate when her globe-trotting uncle Charles (Goode, his unhurried charm and preppy handsomeness put to their best use since 2005′s “Match Point”), whom she’s never met before, arrives to stay.

Before you can say “Shadow of a Doubt,” this urbanely handsome “Uncle Charlie” is arousing India’s suspicions (and, it’s implied, other things besides) as he swiftly cements himself in the household by seducing her brittle, emotionally susceptible mother, Evelyn (Kidman). Shortly afterward, their housekeeper disappears without notice; ditto India’s meddlesome aunt (a brief but tangy turn from Jacki Weaver), who appears to know troubling truths about the intruder, dismissed out of hand by Evelyn.

The is-he-or-isn’t-he question is answered sooner than Hitch might have done it, as India’s darkest instincts about Charles are confirmed by the end of the first half – though, unsurprisingly in this particular story world, this knowledge actually causes her to warm to him a little. (And only a little: when he mentions he desire to be friends, her typically pithy reply is, “We don’t need to be friends, we’re family.”)

But there’s still plenty of mileage in Miller’s warped family melodrama, as the respective and inevitably linked uncertainties about Richard’s death and Charlie’s long absence are kept aloft, while Charlie’s gradual playing of India and Evelyn against each other adds queasy sexual tension to an already chilly mother-daughter relationship. Auds will either go with this festering hotbed of secrets, lies and severed heads, or tune out early, and even the faithful may debate whether or not Park, who otherwise oversees proceedings with amused precision, overplays his hand in the bizarre, bloody finale.

Material this wild demands actors fully committed to the cause, and Park has found them, particularly in his two female leads. Kidman, here extending her commendable record of counterintuitive auteur collaboration, has such form in the area of passive-aggressive ice queens that her work here shouldn’t surprise, but the performance gets more bravely unhinged as it goes along, culminating in a spectacular Mommie Dearest tirade against her daughter that seems ripe for future impressions. Still, it’s Wasikowska’s film, and she shoulders it with witty aplomb: equal parts Alice in Wonderland and Wednesday Addams, her India is in constant, silent argument with the world around her.

All the actors are given an invaluable assist from Kurt Swanson and Bart Mueller’s crisply tailored costumes, which period-indeterminate even as the film is set in the present day. This

anonymouse @ 01/22/2013 at 7:37 am

oops, left off the last bit:

This kind of chic otherness is also at play in Therese De Prez’s superb production design: the Stoker family house, all angular architectural fittings and inventively distorted scale, is a creation worthy of prime Tim Burton.

Park’s regular d.p. Chung-hoon Chung appears to be channeling photographer Gregory Crewdson’s eerily high-key Americana in his lighting schemes, while Clint Mansell’s characteristically rich, modernist score is embellished with haunting piano duets composed specifically for the film by Philip Glass. The repeated use of the Lee Hazlewood/Nancy Sinatra number “Summer Wine,” meanwhile, is typical of the director’s cockeyed take on American culture. Long may he continue to explore.

Camera (color, widescreen), Chung-hoon Chung; editor, Nicolas De Toth; music, Clint Mansell; production designer, Therese De Prez; art director, Wing Lee; set decorator, Leslie Morales; costume designers, Kurt Swanson, Bart Mueller; sound (Dolby, SDDS), Glen Trew; re-recording mixers, Chuck Michael, Jim Bolt; visual effects supervisor, Lee-Jeon Hyoung; visual effects, 4th Creative Party, Reliance Mediaworks; stunt coordinator, Ian Quinn; assistant director, Thomas Fatone; casting, Donna Isaacson. Reviewed at Sundance Film Festival (Premieres), Jan. 20, 2013. MPAA Rating: R. Running time: 98 MIN.

anonymouse @ 01/22/2013 at 8:35 am

oo, i just saw a connect; Nancy Sinatra’s number in here gives me a little echo, with Kidman doing, with Robbie, “and then I went and spoiled it all by saying that I love you” … I LOVE that track with Williams&Kidman … I have it on plastic, and sometimes play it over several times; almost as if I can’t get enough of it; I think we all have music that affects us this way … insatiability … I know all my fb-’Urban’-friends are insatiable for anything “KeithyBaby”, as they refer to him.

anonymouse @ 01/22/2013 at 8:43 am

aha, i finally got it …

just as the film is assessed in this review; “will bewilder – as it bewitches”, so could I say that (borrow) that to describe Kidman … seemingly eternal allure …

Nicole Kidman, my favorite actress. Keith Urban, my favorite entertainer. I am going to enjoy American Idol this year.

anonymouse @ 01/22/2013 at 11:29 am

@anonymouse:
correction:
“… by saying something stupid like ‘I l o v e y o u’”

Williams & Kidman

anonymouse @ 01/22/2013 at 12:07 pm

Sundance Review and Roundup: Park Chan-Wook’s Creepy ‘Stoker’
REVIEWS
BY ANNE THOMPSON
JANUARY 21, 2013 6:11 PM
2 COMMENTS

There’s a risk every time a noted foreign filmmaker takes a stab at an English-language movie. Clearly, Korean filmmaker Park Chan-wook (“Old Boy”) knows his Hollywood history: he admits that Alfred Hitchcock not only inspired him to become a filmmaker but that “Psycho,” “Shadow of a Doubt,” and “The Trouble With Harry” creeped into archetypal thriller “Stoker,” which is based on actor-writer Wentworth Miller’s script.
Park chose his project cannily: “Stoker” is a simple, straightforwardly universal gothic fable that will play across many cultures. In his introduction in Park City Sunday, Park actually called this coming-of-age story a “fairy tale.” Visually and aurally, in terms of the music, sound design and editing, the movie is gorgeous. But some of the iconography is too on-the-nose: saddle shoes, spike heels, insects etc.
The actors do their best with the material, especially Nicole Kidman and Mia Wasikowska, who suddenly lose their husband and father (Dermot Mulroney) in a car accident and are both attracted to a mysterious Uncle (Matthew Goode) who materializes soon after their husband/father dies. But they don’t have much to work with. The plot is all-too predictable.
It’s tempting to wonder what the film would have been like with Colin Firth in the Uncle played by Goode, who makes a sexy but cardboard villain. He might have brought some depth; he may have figured out why he didn’t want to do the role.
Fox Searchlight may be able to sell this high-end horror feature on its top flight elements, but I worry that’s it’s a ‘tweener–not smart-house and not mainstream genre either. Critics may not be kind. See a Sundance sampling below.
The Hollywood Reporter:
Park Chan-Wook leaves the expected streaks of blood across American screens in Stoker, his English-language debut about a young woman whose coming of age takes place among the corpses of family members and neighbors. Fans who have followed the Korean auteur since 2003′s Oldboy will not be disappointed, but a high creep-out factor and top-drawer cast should attract genre fans who’ve never heard of him as well.
Indiewire:
South Korean auteur Park Chan-wook’s filmmaking always dances a fine line between sublime and absurd genre ingredients. “Stoker,” his first American-set, English language picture, is no exception. It’s tempting to resist describing the movie in terms of the cinematic traditions it calls to mind: Alfred Hitchcock’s “Shadow of a Doubt” meets “Heathers,” Park’s creepy tale of a peculiar family wrapped up in murderous antics continues the twisted pleasures that define the director’s filmography.
Hitfix:
I first noticed Mia Wasikowska’s work when she appeared on “In Treatment,” and the performance she gave on that show convinced me that she is a powerhouse, someone of uncommon natural talent. Like any actor, she’s only as good as the roles she’s given, and since “In Treatment,” she hasn’t had the best run of material. “Stoker” is thin in some ways, but taken almost as an expression of her character’s inner life, it is often very compelling. She is very good playing off of Matthew Goode, who is well-cast as Uncle Charlie. There is something corrupt about Goode’s good looks, something crazy just under the surface. It worked for him when he played Ozymandias in “Watchmen,” and he rips into his character here with a dedication that is impressive.
Kidman is less well-treated by the material and she seems somewhat stranded in the role.

Kidman does her best work in roles where she can draw from experience. Good to see she is earning some OK reviews for her perfect type-casting as a psychotic, cold-hearted mother.

You and all your names. No one cares what you think, you are crazy.

anonymouse, get a blog for your bloviations. Oh, wait, you already have several of those. lol

anonymouse @ 01/23/2013 at 1:14 am

@Lia:

quote:
“anonymouse, get a blog for your bloviations. Oh, wait, you already have several of those. lol”

There’s no such word a ‘bloviations’. Get an education!
I don’t have a blog. Get with the programme.

This thread is about Sundance and Stoker and my comments are relevant … wasn’t it you demanding commenters show the reviews? I guess you are not interested in the film or Sundance; just in abusing people, and fighting.

Now, get off my back!!!
In fact, just get out; very tired of your crap.

I have an education, bloviations is the plural of bloviation. Feel free to educate yourself.

Lia has an enviable education in ‘slang’ words, hence her pompous use of the slang word ‘Bloviate’.

anonymouse @ 01/24/2013 at 1:47 am

@Lia:

Thank-you, I have learned something. I have never heard of it, but I read that it is “US INFORMAL”. I don’t live in the US so I have never heard of it, neither my Oxford or Penguin dictionaries describe it.

In any case, the plural is bloviation, not ‘bloviations’. So there, a little lesson for you.

Besides, what I did write was not empty. The fact that you think that merely shows your own incapacity.
The ‘lengthy’ posts are actually written by film critics, posted here because someone demanded of someone the links to reviews; I posted the first 2 I found … for anyone here on these threads genuinely interested in the films talked about, not just being abusive and heckling commenters and keeping everything in the sewer.

ONLINE QUOTE:
“No exact results found for bloviations in the dictionaries.”
British & World English
Did you mean bloviation?
bloviate
Pronunciation: /ˈbləʊvɪeɪt/
Definition of bloviate
verb
[no object] US informal
• talk at length, especially in an inflated or empty way.
Derivatives
Bloviation
noun
bloviator
noun
Origin:
mid 19th century: perhaps from BLOW

Now, off you go; go and blow somewhere else.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Comment and Share!








You have of 5,000 characters left.

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here