Did Nicole Kidman really deserved her Oscar?

Let me start out by saying Nicole was great but I thought Julianne Moore should have won for Far From Heaven. Nicole should have been nominated in the Supporting Actress category (and won). It was not a Lead Actress performance IMO.

IMO, her performance is the best win in the history of the Academy Sorry. She owned the category, she owned the year, she owned the decade.

http://tinyurl.com/26c4cxg

Considering Kidman's past, better performances, the role of Virginia Wolf was played a little too easily with dark brooding looks and furrowed eyebrows. Emo in place of character development. No, it was not Oscar-worthy.

honestly I believe that Julianne Moore stole the film (I know they weren't up for the same award, but the Leading/Supporting actress categories can be debatable in this film). I had to look up to see who won against Julianne that year...Catherine Zeta-Jones? Really Academy?? I mean Chicago was a good movie, but CZJ's acting was nowhere near as powerful and moving as Julianne's. Nicole also did a great job, but I felt her character was more one dimensional, where Julianne showed the audience the extreme internal struggle that Laura was feeling.

I honestly think she should have been nominated, and won, for Eyes Wide Shut, for me that remains her most powerful performance onscreen. I think she was deserved of a nomination for The Hours, but it should have gone to Julianne Moore for Far From Heaven. She should have been nominated for To Die For though, Sharon Stone gave a great performance in Casino, but she gave a great supporting performance. (Had she been placed in the proper category I feel she might have won it as well). 1995 was a pretty crowded year though, I would have also liked to have seen Kathy Bates nominated for Dolores Claiborne.

Kidman has a touch and go history with the Academy, there was Oscar talk for To Die For and The Portrait of a Lady that amounted to nothing. She received back to back Oscars for Moulin Rouge and The Hours and seemed to be on fire in terms of her popularity. Cold Mountain seemed like a sure bet for a third nod, and it didn't happen. (Not upset, she wasn't great, just good). It took her another eight years to finally get in again, and for a film in all honesty that hasn't been burning up box-office records. So I think many in the industry thought it was a pretty special performance, and it was, Rabbit Hole is her best since Dogville in 2004.

No she did not deserve the Oscar. It should have gone to Diane Lane for Unfaithful that year. Nicole was OK in this movie but she was in it for barely 30 mins total. Diane owned Unfaithful. She was extraordinary in it, she was it. I think it's ashame the politics that come with the Oscars. More times than not, they give it to the more "popular" one of the moment, not the one that actually truly deserves it. This is a prime example. It's really disgraceful.

[deleted]

Nicole totally deserved the oscar no doubt about that.