Natalie Portman's Jackie Recreates JFK Assassination

[Denny Zartman]

I saw "Jackie" earlier today. Portman's performance was decent, and the production value was okay at times, but I thought the film was bad. It jumps back and forth in time and not in a cohesive way that serves the story. It's sometimes difficult to tell the location and the time period from scene to scene. The handheld camera was tiresome, and there were so many extreme closeups that it made the film feel claustrophobic.

It didn't seem to have much of a tale to tell, which is weird. It's the story of a prominent woman that went through serious trauma and planned a funeral. The movie doesn't go much beyond that. There was no way to really relate to Jackie as a person.

The actor playing JFK looked great and seemed to do a good job of acting, although his role is miniscule. Peter Sarsgaard was playing RFK. Sarsgaard is one of my least favorite actors. His eyes are so lifeless, and his expression makes him look constantly bored or tired. There's not much to the role of RFK. There's no mention of Cuban CIA plots against Castro that possibly was turned back on JFK, and certainly no Jackie/Robert romantic sub-plot.

The film doesn't dwell on much conspiracy issues. It leaves conspiracy as the last impression when dealing with the subject, so I guess that it could be considered as leaning toward that viewpoint. Jackie initially bemoans the fact that JFK's killing was just some lone Communist nut, but after Oswald is killed, she berates RFK for letting her and her kids go out in public and putting them in possible danger. Since Ruby was immediately captured, I think it can be inferred that she was referring to other conspirators still on the loose. But, again, the subject of conspiracy is minimal compared to the number of scenes featuring Portman wandering the hallways in shock.

The assassination sequence itself is very short and doesn't seem to give any opinion on the number of shots. JFK is seen initially clutching his neck, and then the headshot follows. The head wound depicted seemed to be on the right side of the head above the ear, what I understand is the temporal region.

[James DiEugenio]

AGREE ON EVERY MAJOR POINT.  YOU COULD HAVE WRITTEN MY REVIEW.  WHICH IS UPCOMING.

[Joe Bauer]

I saw "Jackie" today also.

Mr. Zartman, you really nailed much of the key points about the film and the actors involved.

I also thought Sarsgaard was a poor Robert Kennedy.  You are right, he has lifeless, tired eyes.

I think having " just a touch"  of that Kennedy Bostonian accent might have made Sarsgaard's RFK a little more...acceptable?

Portman did capture Jackie's affected speech and traumatized shock and sadness very well.  

And as well Jackie K's  deeply shaken fragility and doubt yet at the same time her defiant strength to stand up to those who were trying to control her and her decisions at the time.

I didn't have a problem with the back and forth time sequence structure.

Perhaps because I have spent so much time and reading effort on this period of JFK/Jackie history.

I was surprised at how much the film centered on not just Jackie, but the Assassination itself. And it didn't hold back on the horrendous brutality of the actual JFK shooting.

I was also surprised the film was being shown only at our smaller independent film theater versus the huge general release one.

Again, as always, I feel as if America's young people will not see this film. If they did, you would hope that it would spark in them at least some interest and awareness of the JFK event history and story.

The Jack Valenti character came across as a real dick in the movie.  I am not an expert on the guy...but from what I've read about Valenti and LBJ...this wasn't far from the truth.

And they didn't show the Albert Thomas character giving LBJ that "YEAH BABY" celebratory wink and smile right after LBJ was sworn in on Air Force 1.  Too bad...because it really happened.

And did you see the expression of offended disdain on the LBJ character's face when Sarsgaard's Robert Kennedy "ordered" everyone ( including Johnson ) to sit down and not mention Oswald's killing, which had just been reported on the TV in the room where Jackie had not yet entered?

And Sarsgaard's dismissive comment about caring less what LBJ wanted when he and Jackie left Air Force 1 after it landed in Washington?

Many not-too-subtle lines and scenes in the film about the cold dislike between LBJ and RFK.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Joe Bauer

[Pat Speer]

40 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

I saw "Jackie" today also.

Mr. Zartman, you really nailed much of the key points about the film and the actors involved.

I also thought Sarsgaard was a poor Robert Kennedy.  You are right, he has lifeless, tired eyes.

I think having " just a touch"  of that Kennedy Bostonian accent might have made Sarsgaard's RFK...a little more...fitting?

Portman did capture Jackie's affected speech and traumatized shock and sadness very well.  

And I thought Portman also captured well Jackie K's greatly shaken fragility and doubt yet at the same time her defiant strength to stand up to those who were trying to control her and her decisions at the time.

I didn't have a problem with the back and forth time sequence structure.

Perhaps because I have spent so much time and reading effort on this period of JFK/Jackie history.

I was surprised at how much the film centered on not just Jackie, but the Assassination itself. And it didn't hold back on the horrendous brutality of the actual JFK shooting.

I was also surprised the film was being shown only at our smaller independent film theater versus the huge general release one.

Again, as always, I feel as if America's young people will not see this film. If they did, you would hope that it would spark in them at least some interest and awareness of the JFK event history and story.

The Jack Valenti character came across as a real dick in the movie.  I am not an expert on the guy...but from what I've read about Valenti and LBJ...this wasn't far from the truth.

And they didn't show the Albert Thomas character giving LBJ that "YEAH BABY" celebratory wink and smile right after LBJ was sworn in on Air Force 1.  Too bad...because it really happened.

And did you see the expression of absolute disdain on the LBJ character's face when Sarsgaard's Robert Kennedy "ordered" everyone ( including Johnson ) to sit down and not mention Oswald's killing, which had just been reported on the TV in the room where Jackie had not yet entered?

And Sarsgaard's dismissive comment about caring less what LBJ wanted when he and Jackie left Air Force 1 after it landed in Washington?

Many not-too-subtle lines and scenes in the film about the cold dislike between LBJ and RFK.

 

I discuss and document the bitterness between RFK and LBJ over what happened in the aftermath to the shooting in chapter 21 of my free online book, here http://www.patspeer.com/chapter-21-things-that-make-me-say-hmmm

[Pamela Brown]

I was thinking about going to see JACKIE at the Uptown theater here in Minneapolis, but with 44mph winds, ice and blowing snow, decided not to.  I did find a copy of the script online, however, and have been reading that: https://www.scribd.com/document/335032523/Jackie-Screenplay#download  You need to create an account and then you can download it.

One thing that popped up immediately as a little red flag is that they call the pink suit a Chanel suit.  It was not.  It was a knock-off of a Chanel suit.  Just a minor point, but, again, something that could easily be corrected.  

The plotline almost lost my attention when it spent so much time on Jackie's tour of the White House, but then it picks up speed and is becoming very interesting.  The scenes seem to move with an internal connection (rather than simply chronological, for example) and this increases the pace.  I can see why Natalie Portman would want to do this script, as there are potentially many character insights about Jackie that have not yet been explored in the multiple miniseries on the assassination.  

(BTW, I am currently taking a screenwriting class where I need to start from scratch with a high-concept idea.  One of the seed ideas I am currently working with is a story about a woman who has a tangential relationship to Lee Oswald and who decides, immediately following the assassination, to attempt to insinuate herself into history by claiming to be his lover. :-))

Edited December 26, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[Pamela Brown]

I've decided to edit this post to add my reactions and concerns about this film, rather than starting new ones...

I just read this in the script, page 26: Jackie:  It had to be some silly little Communist... 

https://www.scribd.com/document/335032523/Jackie-Screenplay#download

I am so disappointed.  That line, though Jackie did say it, is completely trite and looks, by the lack of pauses or direction, as though it carries no emotion with it.  Also, the conversation takes place late evening of the 22nd.  I sincerely doubt Jackie made that statement this early on.  I could be wrong.  I will amend this statement to say that if this phrase is in the movie they have lost me as a viewer.  

I am now starting to wonder if this movie will actually be about "Jackie" or is it simply another WC apologist propaganda piece?  

I noticed they also seem to have removed the conflict when Lady Bird asked Jackie when she arrived on AF1 if she wanted to change her clothes (and she had already set out the nice white linen dress Jackie had worn earlier) and Jackie said at that point, "let them see what they have done." She said that because she was being forced to be photographed with LBJ.  When that phrase appears in the script it is later and does not have that connection.

I am also starting to wonder just how this script went from being an HBO miniseries to a big screen feature film.  And I am wondering who the audience is -- as they seem to be playing cavalierly with history while raising red flags on simple errors, it it probably not be the research community... 

The screenwriter is Noah Oppenheim who had worked on NBC's Today Show and done other things for that network.  Ironic that that is the network that came up with the Garrison "White Paper" and, of course, the Johnny Carson show where Garrison was sandbagged.  

Filming of the interior scenes was done in Paris.  Why? 

Edited December 27, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[Joe Bauer]

There is an excellent review of the film under the "Roger Ebert" website.

The writer gives the film 3 stars.

The critics  "2 films in one" analysis is really a very perceptive one IMHO.

Search Results

Jackie Movie Review & Film Summary (2016) | Roger Ebert

www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jackie-2016

1.  

 Rating: 2.5/4 - ‎Review by Matt Zoller Seitz

Dec 2, 2016 - There are two movies in "Jackie," Pablo Larraín's film about Jackie Kennedy (Natalie Portman) immediately before, during and after the ...

 

 

Edited December 27, 2016 by Joe Bauer

[Pamela Brown]

On 12/23/2016 at 11:56 PM, James DiEugenio said:

AGREE ON EVERY MAJOR POINT.  YOU COULD HAVE WRITTEN MY REVIEW.  WHICH IS UPCOMING.

I, undoubtedly along with many others, will look forward to that...

Edited December 27, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[Pamela Brown]

12 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

There is an excellent review of the film under the "Roger Ebert" website.

The writer gives the film 3 stars.

The critics  "2 films in one" analysis is really a very perceptive one IMHO.

Search Results

Jackie Movie Review & Film Summary (2016) | Roger Ebert

www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jackie-2016

1.  

 Rating: 2.5/4 - ‎Review by Matt Zoller Seitz

Dec 2, 2016 - There are two movies in "Jackie," Pablo Larraín's film about Jackie Kennedy (Natalie Portman) immediately before, during and after the ...

 

 

Interesting but sympathetic review.  

[James DiEugenio]

Here is my review of the film which was posted yesterday:

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/jackie

In included a brief history of the project. The Danish actor who played JFK all too briefly, did JFK's voice so accurately that I think it may have been dubbed.

Edited December 27, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Douglas Caddy]

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/natalie-portman-jackie-reminds-us-why-jfk-assassination-national-tragedy-180961550/

[Pamela Brown]

On 12/27/2016 at 11:37 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Here is my review of the film which was posted yesterday:

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/jackie

In included a brief history of the project. The Danish actor who played JFK all too briefly, did JFK's voice so accurately that I think it may have been dubbed.

Thank you Jim, for a thoughtful and balanced analysis of this movie.  It is a return-to-sanity after all the hype.  I think you are completely correct -- as a biopic on HBO this script would have worked fine; as a feature film it is, from the screenplay anyhow, inwardly tortured and bland regarding the historical connections.  

I am seeing a similarity between this project and BLACK SWAN, in that they are both studies of the inner turmoil of the lovely lead character.  They are both wonderful vehicles for a Best Actress Oscar nod, if not win, which was the case with BS.  And, to me, therein lies the flaw...I became exhausted with the BS character's ups and downs and weirdness, and am starting to feel the same way about this rendition of Jackie K.  

I am not surprised that the character of Jackie seems contrived.  I don't see how anyone can understand her fully, and any attempt to try tends to become pretentious.  The only way to approach that character, imo, is with a sense of mystery.  I doubt that Portman, with all her skills, has done that.  In fact, I am starting to wonder if she might have gone over to the Dark Side...:-0

Edited December 28, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[James DiEugenio]

I agree about the character of Jackie Kennedy.  

And this was a real problem with the film I think. 

 

 

[Pamela Brown]

If you will permit me, I will use this post to add some links to interesting things about Jackie's life immediately after the assassination:

A bit off this topic but an Interesting insight...an article on Jackie's move to NYC in 1964:

http://mortimermediagroup.com/kennedy_article.php

A fascinating letter Jackie tried to get rid of...

http://www.rrauction.com/Jackie_Kennedy.cfm

Here is an article on the horse property that Jackie leased, and later purchased, in New Jersey:

http://www.newjerseyhills.com/bernardsville_news/opinion/columns/retrospect-jackie-kennedy-leases-bernardsville-farmhiouse-in/article_9a239823-76b8-5dd9-812d-7cf1c5ca89b9.html

(Ironically, my parents moved from CT to NJ, not far from there, and my Mother got a tour through the property through a mutual acquaintance in the late 80's...Jackie was not at home, though.)

Edited December 30, 2016 by Pamela Brown

[Hugo Langendoen]

Everything is happening a bit slower in The Netherlands. So the movie Jackie is only in the cinemas here for the last two weeks. Today i went to see it. 

Although i agree with a lot of the things Jim wrote in his review i have to say i still really like the movie. Most of all because of the perspective it gave.

After reading, watching and thinking about the assassination it all becomes so "technical". And a movie like this sets me back in the right place. I mean: now you once again see that it is not only the president who is killed, but also a father and a husband. Also this movie will attract attention to the Kennedy killing. 

I went to see the movie with a colleague and both he and other people in the audience all are interested in the assassination. So hopefully this movie will atrack a lot of attention. 

I really think the Portman plays Jackie in a wonderful way. Of course not all the events will be historically correct. But over all it gives me things to think about.