Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review

Director: Pablo Larraín
Writer: Noah Oppenheim
Cast: Natalie Portman, Peter Sarsgaard, Greta Gerwig
Genre: Biography, Drama, History

About: The days immediately after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy as seen through the eyes of his wife, First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy. Jackie deals with grief while trying to pay homage to her husband.

Review: From a director who's made movies you've probably never heard of, comes Jackie. A bio-pic that takes a lot of liberties and at times seems more like a tabloid magazine, than anything factual.

For a movie that takes place shortly after the assassination of JFK and covers the time frame up until his state funeral....there's not a lot going on here. That's partially because the director decided to tell his story instead of showing it. What we get is a reporter interviewing Jackie about the tragic events and we then learn about the inner workings of Jackie's mind and her time in the white house, by listening to her interview.

What I learned about Jackie was: she smoked too much, sounded like Marilyn Monroe, was controlling, self centered..and mostly I learned she was selfish...very selfish...being more concerned with herself than anyone else.

I love historical Bio Pics BTW, but if you want to see a stimulating and original look at the assassination of JFK watch Parkland (2013). Oh sure Jackie is filmed beautifully, but that only makes it all dressed up with no where to go.


But wait a minute! This movie did have something to say. In fact it had a LOT to say, only it was said in such a low key manner that if one isn't paying attention, the writer's agenda will be missed all together.

So what did the scriptwriter, who's a former president of NBC News and a noted conservative, Noah Oppenheim have to say?...His script touts the idea that John F Kennedy's presidency as Camelot, was a made up idea, fabricated by a selfish first lady, and that the only real legacy of JFK is whatever a media savvy Jackie constructed for her own vanity.

And the script tells us that JFK achieved nothing noteworthy in his presidency and unlike Lincoln who was sanctified as a great man after being assassinate...JFK would have been forgotten much like Presidents Garfield and McKinley have been...if it had not been for the self serving whims of Jackie.

One of the most blatant tabloid like scenes is where Jackie tells a priest that she planned an elaborate funeral for JFK...and confesses that grand funeral is not for JKF, and not for America, but only to make herself feel good. That's BS! a priest would never betray a private conversation and according to history the funeral was planned by Robert Sargent Shriver, Jackie's brother in law. The film makes Jackie out to be some type of egotistical individual who manipulated the media on the Kennedy's behalf.

Jackie (2016), is a professionally constructed right wing propaganda film. It's message is so subtly delivered, that it's absorbed rather than shoved into our faces. It's agenda film making at it's worse...The events that occurred after the assassination are being contorted by dialogue that history never recorded and so can never be substantiated. The story we are shown is 'off camera' moments, where the truth of the JFK presidency is coming from the mind of NBC news president Noah Oppenheim.


I'm giving this 1 popcorn rating and that's only for the stylish DVD cover.

Attachments

     

I'm repping that review, not because I've seen Jackie (I haven't), but I did see Parkland! (not even Zac Efron could ruin it!)

Attachments

 

I haven't seen Jackie yet, but I'm surprised, (and kind of saddened), to see it get such a low rating. It's one of the movies that I was looking forward to watching.

__________________
.
If I answer a game thread correctly, just skip my turn and continue with the game.
OPEN FLOOR.

I wish you would watch it. I would be very interested in what you think of it. You might not reach the same conclusions as I did. I know Gideon liked it. If you do watch it, please pop in here and let me know what you thought of it.

It's still on my watchlist, but I'm not looking forward to it as much as I was before I read your review. I'm very far behind on watching movies from 2016, so it will probably be a while before I get to it, but I'll let you know what I think of it when I eventually get around to it.

Review: I was very impressed with this movie that was made by a German director in Soviet controlled Berlin 1945, right after the war. This is the closest I've seen in a movie to what the actual conditions must have been like in bombed out wartime Berlin. That photo I used...that's not done in a studio, that's the guts of bombed out buildings where untold 10,000s of civilians died. If only those ghost could speak, what tales would they tell.

I was impressed by the skill of the film making and the cinematography. I guess I was expecting almost a homemade movie look, as this was done post war and I didn't expect them to have the resources to make the film look so stunningly beautiful. And it is beauty, in it's austere tone. Of course we're talking about a German director who was well versed in German Expressionism. Here you can see where American directors drew their inspiration for the dark and shadowy Film Noirs of the 1940s-50s.

1 star for Jackie against my 5 stars just goes to show what a polarizing film it was.

I'll skip watching it altogether so we may have even more variety.

That's cool, we all have different taste. I can say the movie looked great and was very cinematic and stylish. The score was unique too. But I couldn't go with subliminal hatchet job on the Kennedy's from a right wing scriptwriter. I've only given a few 1 star ratings, it seemed weird but it felt right too.

It was fascinating reading your review because none of that would have crossed my mind. Even if I disagree - I didn't think it was a very politically-charged movie at it's core (at least not in the sense that it had any agenda or anything) - I enjoyed your unique perspective and it definitely made me think for a second. And I'm a pretty liberal person, I guess, if that means anything.

The director is a leftist but not a propagandist. I've seen four of his films.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Not the director...I was criticizing the scriptwriter Noah Oppenheim, who's a conservative and former President of NBC news. The director is not always lord and master of the film. The visual style and other attributes are often attributed to the director, but the words that come out of the mouth of the actors comes straight from the scriptwriter. Watch Jackie (2016) carefully, the message is that the Kennedy's (JFK and RFK) don't deserve the praise that is heaped on them by the masses and only received that praise do to Jackie's efforts.

Watched it already - twice. I guess the minimal dialogue was so subliminal that only you got it. If any film belonged to a director, it's Jackie. But yes, the screenwriter usually doesn't get as much credit or blame as the director does, but to me, the emotional heart and truth of the film is in the direction.

I guess we can agree to disagree.

awww, someone is doing a revisiting homage to the 40's HoF. Some really amazing movies in that one and two excellent examples here.
Bravo!

__________________
What I actually said to win MovieGal's heart:
- I might not be a real King of Kinkiness, but I make good pancakes

~Mr Minio

was doing some catch up and saw these were NOT the only ones -- very, VERY cool!! Loved re-reading your reviews of them

Also, sorry to hear that Harold and Maude wasn't for you - enjoyed your review all the same though!

Do you think you'd ever watch Murderers Are Among Us with English subtitles, or are you content to leave your experience the way it is?

__________________

I believe in recycling

I do rewrite the reviews, sometimes a lot, sometimes a little. But when I read what I had originally wrote for Waterloo Bridge, I knew it perfectly expressed what I wanted to say.

Thanks Ed, I've been watching 2016 films, some classics that I've never seen before like Harold and Maude, among other stuff. I'll probably be watching much more 1940s in the coming future.

Cosmic, funny you should ask, because I was just thinking I would really like to see it with English subtitles. The only way I can do that is if I buy it, and right now I can't afford it, but yes! I would really like to revisit your nom, and this time with English subtitles