8+ months later I completely randomly stumbled on this article and because of the provocative title went ahead and read it. It seemed odd in several respects, and I wondered whether she was called on that in the comments. Like many here, I had to scroll for quite awhile to find the dissenting (and, I would think, most…

zoicks.....scary.

It’s funny. I just so randomly stumbled upon this story, and my first response was “Wait. What did the husband text the friend?” It seems like an obviously missing chunk to the story. And the fact that her writing is otherwise detailed, and she seems pretty self-aware generally, contrasts with this blurred-out middle…

One detail ommitted that seems pretty key: what exactly did your husband text to your friend that led her to reply that she didn’t care about his opinion of her, and to lash out with an insult about him? I’m surprised no one else seems to have asked about this--but you mention they had a disagreement, that she texted…

Now *that* is cool.

Gravitas is spot on, as well as what Grumpy Eagle says below about her “mystique really encompassed taste, high culture, East Coast elitism, and a ‘lovely way about her’,” which—-if Portman had captured those aspects to her—the size of her nose of shape of her chin wouldn’t matter, but Portman-as-Jackie’s mien is too…

unfortunately, I think your initial response was the most apt one...the film is being hyped because...it’s being hyped. It’s advertising/marketing.

Exactly. It would take very rigorous acting to retrain her face to be both more open and placid and more guarded than Portman, but...that is the kind of acting that actually would be Oscar-worthy.

It’s just pre-Oscar hype. The media is getting very aggressive about trying to shape public opinion by insisting things that almost no one is buying as true anymore. Not to make too much of an ultimately somewhat silly film, but it’s getting tiresome when you read something and it’s just malarky trying to convince you…

They’re not though. They should have a great deal more hairspray in them, for one thing. Natalie Portman’s hair is flying and flopping all over the place, which was perceived as “wild,” for a lady. Completely undesirable to look out of control, messy, unpolished, “natural,”  unmanaged, or not properly…

She just doesn’t seem to understand Jackie Kennedy Onassis. You can “look” quite a bit like someone physically and still be unconvincing if you completely mis-understand them.

I am so glad you said that! I thought the same exact thing and also thought it was petty/superficial. But yeeesh, how hard is it to get make-up right?

Me too. I was disappointed in Carrell. I felt he relied on prosthetics as a cructh because he didn’t believe in his own acting. His acting was very good. He should have just gone for it, without leaning on that preposterous proboscis.

Exactly. You can 5'3" and appear a giant (Bette Davis)

Exactly.

Oh god, no. Just better acting. Even Natalie Portman is a better actress than to have to rely on false noses, etc.

Exactly. But the thing is with exceptionally good acting someone can transform into the person, even if they look less alike than Natalie Portman and Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Her acting just seems too superficial. She seems like a 21st Century woman halfway trying to “sort of act something like” Jackie. In…