Author |
Message |
David
Pure Phase
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am Posts: 34810 Location: Maryland
|
 Jackie (2016)
 Quote: Jackie is a 2016 biographical drama film directed by Pablo Larraín and written by Noah Oppenheim. The film stars Natalie Portman as the titular character, following her life after the assassination of her husband in 1963. Peter Sarsgaard, Greta Gerwig, Billy Crudup and John Hurt also star.
_________________   1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game
|
Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:14 pm |
|
 |
thompsoncory
Rachel McAdams Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am Posts: 13613 Location: New York, NY
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
It's a beautiful movie on a technical level and Natalie Portman gives a strong performance but it left me completely cold. Portman is good but this is far from career-best work - it doesn't even touch her performances in Black Swan or Closer for example. I also found Peter Sarsgaard rather bad. It moves at an incredibly languid pace and more closely resembles an art house film than a conventional biopic. B-
|
Sat Dec 03, 2016 2:56 pm |
|
 |
The Dark Shape
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:56 am Posts: 12117 Location: Adrift in L.A.
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
It's a movie that's at war with itself. The Oscar-bait interview segments with Billy Crudup distract from the more fly-on-the-wall moments with Jackie dealing with the aftermath of Kennedy's assassination.
Portman is great, but the movie never gels into something special, even though all the pieces are there. B-
|
Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:23 am |
|
 |
thompsoncory
Rachel McAdams Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am Posts: 13613 Location: New York, NY
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
The framing device was weird - it was almost like they were trying to make this movie mainstream-accessible by having those scenes when it really isn't at all.
The score of the film is honestly the best part.
|
Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:50 pm |
|
 |
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92095 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
Splendid cinematography and a terrific performance by Portman can't change that this feels so incredibly cold and detached. You see Jackie suffering in the aftermath of Kennedy's assassination, but I never understood why the fuck I should care as a viewer. It is clinical in its approach.
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Mon Dec 05, 2016 8:46 pm |
|
 |
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 48343 Location: Multi-tasking
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
In some ways, Jackie is a hard movie to love, but Natalie Portman's performance is not. This is a deeper level, shattering performance that builds on the work she has done in movies like Black Swan. It took me a few minutes to warm up to her characterization, but by the end, it's clear that this is a perfectly calibrated, well modulated portrayal of raw grief. Not sure I would give her a second Oscar for this, but she should certainly be in the running. I liked, but did not love, the rest of the film. It's one that is easier for me to admire than go gaga for, but Portman's searing, powerful work in the lead role easily stands out. B+
|
Sat Dec 10, 2016 10:34 pm |
|
 |
thompsoncory
Rachel McAdams Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am Posts: 13613 Location: New York, NY
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
This is the most forgettable movie of awards season, and I saw it only a week ago. Everything else in contention is so much better.
|
Sun Dec 11, 2016 1:24 am |
|
 |
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92095 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
You might not like it and I sure as hell didn't love it, but forgettable, it is not.
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:58 am |
|
 |
zwackerm
Hold the door!
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm Posts: 14395 Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
thompsoncory is threatened by the fact Portman's performance could take the Oscar from Emma Stone.
_________________
|
Sun Dec 11, 2016 1:09 pm |
|
 |
publicenemy#1
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:25 am Posts: 14433 Location: San Diego
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
I think this is definitely Portman at her finest. The film around her is a little hard to be invested in apart from the way the assassination was depicted but I didn't think it was bad.
|
Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:01 am |
|
 |
David
Pure Phase
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am Posts: 34810 Location: Maryland
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
After the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Jacqueline Kennedy must, as a widowed first lady, plan his elaborate Washington, D.C. funeral and participate in the transfer of the White House to Lyndon B. Johnson while also quietly mourning a man who was her (unfaithful) husband, as well as the adoring father of her two living children. An almost Gothic, often non-chronological symphony of memories, moments, and moods rather than a traditional biography, this film hones in on the point where one’s public duty and private life intersect. As envisioned here, Mrs. Kennedy is a complicated figure profoundly aware of history’s judgment, the importance of symbolism in American culture, and the power of the media even as her life is in violent flux. She is inhabited by Natalie Portman in her finest performance to date; the Academy Award winner perfectly captures her subject’s legendary poise and almost otherworldly Mid-Atlantic accent while also infusing her with very recognizable veins of anger, despair, self-doubt, and vanity.
A
_________________   1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game
|
Mon Dec 26, 2016 10:03 pm |
|
 |
jmovies
Let's Call It A Bromance
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:22 pm Posts: 12330
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
Easy candidate for overrated Oscar film of the year. Portman is fine but the screenplay is fairly weak here becoming fairly repetitive and the film shies away from much more gripping material only stated in quick one sentence references.
|
Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:55 pm |
|
 |
Magic Mike
Wallflower
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 32918 Location: Minnesota
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
Portman is great but everyone calling the film cold, detached, etc... hit the nail on the head. It's just hard to really care and it moves at such a glacial pace.
_________________
|
Wed Feb 01, 2017 4:45 am |
|
 |
zwackerm
Hold the door!
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm Posts: 14395 Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
This is possibly the least conventional biopic I've ever seen. I thought it was very interesting and I loved the visual style, and Portman seems to have nailed Jackie O. My friend fell asleep and hated it. It's a weird, artsy film, but it's certainly worth a watch.
B
_________________
Last edited by zwackerm on Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:32 pm |
|
 |
Magic Mike
Wallflower
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 32918 Location: Minnesota
|
 Re: Jackie (2016)
zwackerm wrote: Potman seems to have nailed Jackie O. 
_________________
|
Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:46 am |
|
 |
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 62735
|
Jackie
I saw this yesterday at the cinema. I know, I know. China and their ridiculously late release schedule!
Well, anyway, it wasn't bad, but certainly not award-worthy. Portman, who if I remember correctly was the main focus for ballot voters last year, wasn't overly impressive. She never transcended "Portman playing JFK's wife", though she obviously put the effort in. That much was clear. More than can be said for Sarsgaard, who is one of the most overrated actors working today. While I believe the film was told from the correct viewpoint, it was never entirely engaging, and only sparked my interest in the dozen or so interview scenes with Billy Crudup's character. The rest, while not boring, was less engaging since we all know the story. The film sort of does, but also shies away from showing full-on gore. It wanted to, but it was self-aware [of its potential awards buzz], so we're left with bloodied clothes, fast edits so as you don't actually see anything, and blood pouring down Portman's back in the shower. The film is too shallow as a study into the psyche of a post-assassination Jackie Kennedy (though I will say that for someone like me who hasn't the foggiest about US political figures, the film does provide adequate insight into the type of women she maybe was), and seems reluctant to show the death and ensuing furore, which doesn't leave much left besides the impeccable costuming, grainy 60s cinematography, and a few apt lines from John Hurt.
B-
|
Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:54 pm |
|
|