SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Unbelievably dull. Natalie Portman's "authentic" accent is so incomprehensible that we couldn't work out what she was mumbling. Truly a Marlon Brando for our age. So glad we missed this at the cinema. Gave up watching after about 20-30 minutes. First time that's happened in years - we usually stick with a film to the end, but this one was just unbearable and, frankly, life is too short.

Jackie Kennedy, while an interesting historical figure, isn't a very cinematic one. "Jackie" is done visually in a very dark, quiet style that is pleasant to view, but the film lacks virtually any content that's interesting or relevant. Hell, there isn't really even a story to this film, but rather just events in Jackie Kennedy's life. How she deals with the assassination of her husband is the pivotal focus, but not even Natalie Portman's spot-on portrayal helps the film. This film seems like it was just sort of made for the sake of being made, crossing off another historical figure to make a movie about and get another famous actress an Oscar or nomination.

I was curious to see this film as I love history and do find the Kennedy story interesting. This film was in many respects interest - mostly because it surprised me and did not give me what I was expecting. The time-frame is very brief, just the week or so following the assassination. Jackie was portrayed as a rather vain, course, and defensive person who smokes and drinks a lot, all of which could be due to the recent circumstances in her life. Portman's performance was also interesting in that she didn't treat the role with awe and gave it to us straight, which I appreciate. I actually really enjoyed the score quite a bit, but didn't think it was a great match for this specific project. Like I said, it was interesting but as a whole a little disappointing. This is the part in a film review of this type where I would usually mention that only if you're a big Jackie fan should you take the time to see this film. However, I will change that to read that if you're a real Jackie fan you probably shouldn't see this film because it does not portray her in the elevated, glamorous light so many want to think of her in, and you will likely be disappointed. Please don't hold your imaginary, fantasy ideas of what you want this person to be against this film and it's participants.

It must take some doing the assassination of JFK and reduce to the level of boredom the viewer has to endure for one and a half hours. I really struggled to find a reason the film was made it just seemed to drift along and then end, my wife asked "Is that it?" sadly yes. I think Natalie Portman did an OK job with a awful script and the soundtrack was too loud and dreary. I am trying to understand what they wanted to convey, was it that Jackie was pretty much self absorbed? The whole thing just plods along a bit like the scene were she plods through the Arlington cemetery mud. They also missed the moving scene were the son salutes the coffin, this film unfortunately is not worth your wasted time watching it.