MovieChat Forums > Jackie (2016) Discussion > Extremely boring

Extremely boring

posted 8 years ago by ezepeda-821-967785
56 replies | jump to latest

Am I the only who is not on board with this film? I love Natalie Portman, I'm obsessed with the Kennedy era, and I love the fact that they shot using actual film, but this film did not do anything for me, even though I wanted to love it.

The whole thing is pretty much Natalie walking around with a frantic look while classical music plays in a minor key.

I couldn't buy her accent or the way she talked, and it doesn't help that the whole movie is her talking. The accent made her character seem like it was from an SNL skit.

None of the scenes connected, which I get is the point of the film, to show how much of a blur that week was supposed to be, but it just seemed like nonsense scenes thrown together.

I couldn't believe it was only 1 hour and 39 minutes, it moved so slow. I'm really disappointed because I love so many aspects surrounding the film, but I thought it was extremely boring and couldn't wait for it to end.

[–] fitchj21 8 years ago

I haven't seen it yet but your opinion is very discouraging to me cause I really am looking forward to seeing it. Your opinion sounds similar to my opinion of Lincoln (with DD Lewis). I found that to be dreadfully boring and slow.

[–] ezepeda-821-967785 8 years ago

That Lincoln reference is spot on, I had the same thought while watching Jackie.

[–] mikeyflatley 8 years ago

Good 2 know ur a dummy bec Lincoln movie wuz spectacular 2 us historianz

Werd 2 ur mudda, bruddafckka

[–] robertsig 8 years ago

Using the Lincoln reference may be enough to sway me away from it. Ugh. I couldn't get through Lincoln myself. I turned it off half-way through, not caring what happened to the rest of the story (even though we all know).

[–] memoriesofgreen 8 years ago

Lincoln was a 2 and a half hour snoozefest. This film is only 90 mins. I disagree completely with the OP that it was boring - I thought it was tremendously well put together. Natalie gives a very layered performance and the directing is wonderful. The music in particular adds so much to the film.

Read some of the reviews which are mostly positive and make up your mind then, perhaps over just listening to the opinion of one person on a message board lol.

[–] jen_78 8 years ago

I found the music to be completely distracting. It made me feel like I was watching a horror movie.

[–] astronaut1 8 years ago

I have to agree here, the music was deafening at times and really didn't fit the scenes for me. I guess good music for me doesn't take me out of the movie; I don't physically notice it is there, but the music in this film made me wince a couple of times and think 'what a din.'

I'm glad I'm not the only one to think this.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Vins_gurl18 8 years ago

I think SOME Films are meant to be "Experiences" and others are meant to be "entertaining".

I'm thinking maybe this film "Jackie" was meant to be more like an "experience". There IS no point really... You're just supposed to feel like you've been transported back to that gripping day back in November 1963.... You're supposed to feel the chaos Jackie felt the days after.

I haven't seen the movie myself, but this is just my impression based on the reviews here so far.

Using the Lincoln reference may be enough to sway me away from it. Ugh. I couldn't get through Lincoln myself. I turned it off half-way through, not caring what happened to the rest of the story (even though we all know).

Oh no.... if you think "Lincoln" was boring (I actually found it pretty interesting....high-brow and overly verbose yes...but interesting in the dialogue nonetheless) then you obviously haven't seen "The New World". "The New World" (with Colin Farrel) has got to be the single most BORING movie I've ever seen in a movie theater in my LIFE!!!! Talk about 3 hours of mostly silence, cinematography, low-dialogue, mixed scenes here and there... UGh!

Yes, we all know the story of John Smith and Pocahontas, but boy...that movie was PAIN-inducing slow smh.... It's a shame too because I actually was excited to see it. But boy... what slowness it had...

I think I will save "Jackie" for Netflix or TV watching. Movie ticket prices are so high these days. I don't need to waste my money on something that's going to be so boring and low-dialogue-ridden. No thank you.

[–] joekiddlouischama 8 years ago

I viewed Lincoln in the theater three times. I really liked the film and thought that it was "very good," but close as it came, it could not quite bust through to greatness. Overall, there was something a hair too calculated about the way it played. Jackie is similarly intricate (and calculated), but it lacks the technical mastery of Steven Spielberg and the enveloping quietude that gave Lincoln much of its charm and its sense of historical verisimilitude.

I have viewed Manchester by the Sea twice now. After my second screening last night, I upgraded the film slightly from "good" to "good/very good." Its strengths are very strong, but it is significantly flawed, too. Overall, without having seen the 2016 releases that are just about to break wide such as Martin Scorsese's Silence, I would probably consider Manchester by the Sea one of the year's ten best movies, but not one of the five best. Then again, among 2016 feature film releases, I have only deemed one movie "great" and four others a full-fledged "very good."

[–] centauri2014 8 years ago

Your opinion sounds similar to my opinion of Lincoln (with DD Lewis). I found that to be dreadfully boring and slow.

At least it was well-acted, though.

Ladies and gentlemen...Mr.Conway Twitty

[–] calsmom 8 years ago

I agreed, one of the dullest movies I've seen in a long time. I did look up Jackie on youTube and strangely her accents and vocal mannerisms are spot on. We most often see her in still photos, in real life she sounded drugged and and almost like she was doing a Marilyn Monroe impersonation.

[–] ezepeda-821-967785 8 years ago

Agreed, I looked up the original White House tour she gave and Natalie did a great job with her accent.

[–] punchallwhitewomen 8 years ago

I always thought Jackie sounded kind of . . . slow.

[–] punchallwhitewomen 8 years ago

I used to be obsessed with J.F.K. when I was in high school and middle school, and I read so many books about him and Jackie. I've seen them in pictures a million times. It is hard for me to get lost in actors playing them when I feel like I know so much about the real life people. So I don't know how I am going to feel about this.

[–] JaxArcher 8 years ago

Wait, so would you say this movie is as slow and boring as Lincoln? The trailer looked very promising but if it's as painstakingly slow as Lincoln, then I definitely want a head's up!

[–] Rootselsewhere 8 years ago

I was really looking forward to this and thought it was poorly executed with good intentions to examine JBK during this time. I would not recommend this, at all. I think anyone who remembers this horrific time would not appreciate this film. I think Natalie Portman did the best she could with the material, but I wasn't sold on the casting of most of the actors.

[–] mikeyflatley 8 years ago

Lincoln wuz a monumental film, u ppl wudnt know a grate movie if it hit u in da head

Werd 2 ur mudda, bruddafckka

[–] kmc-4 8 years ago

I just saw it at a sneak preview. I wouldn't say that it was boring, but it wasn't overly interesting, either. I'd call it a good vehicle for a talented actress, but I can't think of anyone who looks enough like Jackie Kennedy to pull off the part. I didn't see her; I saw Natalie Portman dressed like her but not even sounding like her. Does that make sense?

[–] andyhain 8 years ago

"I can't think of anyone who looks enough like Jackie Kennedy to pull off the part"

Perhaps you should limit your viewing to Saturday Night Live, where they do impersonations, not acting.

[–] seanthornton1231 8 years ago

This is one of the most boring films I've ever seen in my life. I was going to post the same topic myself. Thank you for saving me the time.

[–] racerx525 8 years ago

Boring? Try watching Manchester By the Sea a couple of days before Jackie. Now THAT was an overrated snoozer. I liked Jackie but I don't see any compelling reason to see it in a theater. Cable would be fine.

[–] robertwilliams60-1 8 years ago

I found "Jackie" to be a powerful movie. I will say this however, the movie needed to take out five minutes of the drawn out funeral planning drama and insert five minutes of interaction between JFK and Jackie.

Jackie's love for JFK is evident, both in history and her dialogue in the movie but in order to feel Jackie's heartbreak it would have helped to feel her love. JFK is merely a prop in this otherwise well crafted movie.

I was a Kennedy staffer way back when, so to my attuned eye there were a few... but very few historical inaccuracies. I thought the movie dragged at times, as I said it needed a dose of the fun and promise of those days, it needed a touch of what JFK and JBK meant to each other.

It is worth seeing, the cinematography is amazing, the music, while melancholy is gripping, the blending of historical footage and new scenes is flawless. I'd go see "Jackie".

Lincoln? Oy Vey! That was brutal.

[–] ezepeda-821-967785 8 years ago

That's disappointing to hear! I was really hoping Manchester by the Sea would be great.

[–] jen_78 8 years ago

I actually really liked Manchester By the Sea... except for the ending. Ugh. I was much more engaged with the story than I was Jackie.

[–] pixelwks 8 years ago

I didn't find it boring at all.

But I don't spend all day playing with a phone and acting like I'm doing something.