I saw Jackie today and I was less than impressed. There were moments of striking brilliance performance wise and some breathtaking visuals, but the film as a whole left me cold. I've seen better cinematic depictions of grief (hell, I thought Rabbit Hole was better in that respect) and again I think much of the films power was cribbed from the blending of stock footage and sentimentality of the iconic images. I think that is cheating a little.
Also, I came away feeling like the takeaway was that Jackie was a fraud. This seemed odd. Yes, I get the film was about facades but it felt hollow. I know very little about Jackie and this film gave me little to no insight into her. Even a grieving woman in a hurricane has more depth, especially the controlling one being interviewed. I don't even feel the film gave her much dignity.
At 90 minutes I found the film a slog. I adore Portman but I found it her most superficial performance. At times she sounded like Drew Barrymore's Little Edie complete with "You understand?" and other times no accent. She went from zombiefied to hysterical. It got old quick. I found the screenplay lackluster. Portman limped from one scene to another. If you look on rotten tomatoes, critics love it, audiences are more critical and not really getting it so much.
I thought Richard E Grant as the decorator was a sympathetic standout
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello